Literature DB >> 14986052

Locally advanced breast cancer: comparison of mammography, sonography and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Viviana Londero1, Massimo Bazzocchi, Chiara Del Frate, Fabio Puglisi, Carla Di Loreto, Giuliana Francescutti, Chiara Zuiani.   

Abstract

The accuracy of mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in identifying residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is evaluated and imaging findings are correlated with pathologic findings. Fifteen patients enrolled in an experimental protocol of preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy underwent clinical examination, mammography, sonography and dynamic MRI, performed in this order, before and respectively after 2 and 4 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Four radiologists, two for mammography, one for sonography and one for MR, examined the images, blinded to the results of the other examinations. All patients underwent radical or conservative surgery, and imaging findings were compared with pathologic findings. MRI identified 2/15 (13.3.%) clinically complete response (CR), 9/15 (60%) partial response (PR), 3/15 (20%) stable disease (SD) and 1/15 (6.7%) progressive disease. Mammography identified 1/15 (6.7%) clinically CR, 8/15 (53.3%) PR and 4/15 (27%) SD, and was not able to evaluate the disease in 2/15 (13%) cases. Sonography presented the same results as MRI. Therefore, MRI and sonography compared to mammography correctly identified residual disease in 100 vs. 86%. MRI resulted in two false-negative results because of the presence of microfoci of in situ ductal carcinoma (DCIS) and invasive lobular carcinoma (LCI). MRI was superior to mammography in cases of multifocal or multicentric disease (83 vs. 33%). Sonography performed after MRI improves the accuracy in evaluation of uncertain foci of multifocal disease seen on MR images with an increase of diagnostic accuracy from 73 to 84.5%. MRI assesses response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy better than traditional methods of physical examination and mammography.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14986052     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-004-2246-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  26 in total

1.  MRI of breast cancer: influence of chemotherapy on sensitivity.

Authors:  A Rieber; H Zeitler; H Rosenthal; J Görich; R Kreienberg; H J Brambs; R Tomczak
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Experience of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer at a public hospital: retrospective study.

Authors:  W K Hung; Y Lau; C M Chan; A W Yip
Journal:  Hong Kong Med J       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.227

3.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Authors:  P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: evidence for improved preoperative staging.

Authors:  L Esserman; N Hylton; L Yassa; J Barclay; S Frankel; E Sickles
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 5.  Preoperative chemotherapy: a model for studying the biology and therapy of primary breast cancer.

Authors:  B Fisher; E P Mamounas
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  The effect of systemic therapy on local-regional control in locally advanced breast cancer.

Authors:  L J Pierce; M Lippman; N Ben-Baruch; S Swain; J O'Shaughnessy; J L Bader; D Danforth; D Venzon; K H Cowan
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Usefulness of tissue marker clips in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  N Dash; S H Chafin; R R Johnson; F M Contractor
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer.

Authors:  B Fisher; J Bryant; N Wolmark; E Mamounas; A Brown; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; M Begovic; A DeCillis; A Robidoux; R G Margolese; A B Cruz; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; N V Dimitrov; H D Bear
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent.

Authors:  C Boetes; R D Mus; R Holland; J O Barentsz; S P Strijk; T Wobbes; J H Hendriks; S H Ruys
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 10.  Multidisciplinary management of advanced primary and metastatic breast cancer.

Authors:  G N Hortobagyi
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1994-07-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  68 in total

1.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: correlation between the baseline MR imaging findings and responses to therapy.

Authors:  Takayoshi Uematsu; Masako Kasami; Sachiko Yuen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-05-09       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Inflammatory breast carcinoma and locally advanced breast carcinoma: characterisation with MR imaging.

Authors:  V Girardi; G Carbognin; L Camera; F Bonetti; E Manfrin; G Pollini; R Pozzi Mucelli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  Serum DNA methylation for monitoring response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Ayelet Avraham; Ronit Uhlmann; Aino Shperber; Miriam Birnbaum; Judith Sandbank; Avishay Sella; Saraswati Sukumar; Ella Evron
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 7.396

4.  Breast cancer spatial heterogeneity in near-infrared spectra and the prediction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy response.

Authors:  Ylenia Santoro; Anaïs Leproux; Albert Cerussi; Bruce Tromberg; Enrico Gratton
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.170

5.  Ability of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography to determine clinical responses of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Ai Amioka; Norio Masumoto; Noriko Gouda; Keiko Kajitani; Hideo Shigematsu; Akiko Emi; Takayuki Kadoya; Morihito Okada
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 3.019

6.  DW-MRI ADC values can predict treatment response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Xi-Ru Li; Liu-Quan Cheng; Mei Liu; Yan-Jun Zhang; Jian-Dong Wang; Ai-Lian Zhang; Xin Song; Jie Li; Yi-Qiong Zheng; Lei Liu
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 3.064

7.  Accuracy of physical examination, ultrasonography, and mammography in predicting residual pathologic tumor size in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Anees B Chagpar; Lavinia P Middleton; Aysegul A Sahin; Peter Dempsey; Aman U Buzdar; Attiqa N Mirza; Fredrick C Ames; Gildy V Babiera; Barry W Feig; Kelly K Hunt; Henry M Kuerer; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Merrick I Ross; S Eva Singletary
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Comparison between different imaging techniques in the evaluation of malignant breast lesions: can 3D ultrasound be useful?

Authors:  Paola Clauser; Viviana Londero; Giuseppe Como; Rossano Girometti; Massimo Bazzocchi; Chiara Zuiani
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  [Therapy monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy with MRI. RECIST and functional imaging].

Authors:  S Grandl; M Ingrisch; K Hellerhoff
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 0.635

10.  Prediction of Pathologic Complete Response in Breast Cancer Patients Comparing Magnetic Resonance Imaging with Ultrasound in Neoadjuvant Setting.

Authors:  Frederik Knude Palshof; Charlotte Lanng; Niels Kroman; Cemil Benian; Ilse Vejborg; Anne Bak; Maj-Lis Talman; Eva Balslev; Tove Filtenborg Tvedskov
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 5.344

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.