Literature DB >> 19774441

Fischer's score criteria correlating with histopathological prognostic factors in invasive breast cancer.

V Girardi1, G Carbognin, L Camera, M Tonegutti, F Bonetti, E Manfrin, R Pozzi Mucelli.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate whether the Fischer score criteria on contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (CE-MR) imaging could correlate with histopathological prognostic factors in invasive breast cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-two women with histologically proven invasive breast cancer underwent preoperative CE-MR imaging. Images were assessed for the following parameters, according to the scoring system described by Fischer in 1999: tumour shape, margins, internal enhancement, signal intensity increase, signal intensity course and overall Fischer score. Evaluated histopathological prognostic factors included histological type, associated extensive intraductal component, diameter, lymph node metastasis, tumour grade, and oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), Ki67 proliferation, oncogene c-erbB-2 (HER2/neu) expression. Fisher's exact test was used to correlate the CE-MR imaging parameters and histopathological findings (with significance set a p < 0.05).
RESULTS: Fischer's score was 0-4 in 14/72 (19%) cases, >4 in 58/72 (81%) and 3 in 5/72 (7%; false negative), with a sensitivity of 93%. A significant correlation (p=0.02) was found between stellate-dendritic shape and the presence of an associated extensive intraductal component (EIC), which was found in 78% of stellate tumours vs. 49% of round-oval tumours. A significant correlation (p=0.039) was found between Ki67 expression and signal intensity course (Ki67 overexpression was present in 81% of tumours with washout course vs. 21% with plateau course).
CONCLUSIONS: The CE-MR imaging findings that correlate with prognostic factors are shape and signal intensity curve. Fischer's multifactorial analysis was helpful in the interpretation of CE-MR images, showing a sensitivity of 93% for invasive breast cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19774441     DOI: 10.1007/s11547-009-0453-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Med        ISSN: 0033-8362            Impact factor:   3.469


  25 in total

Review 1.  MRI of the breast.

Authors:  S C Rankin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Indications for breast magnetic resonance imaging. Consensus document "Attualità in senologia", Florence 2007.

Authors:  F Sardanelli; G M Giuseppetti; G Canavese; L Cataliotti; S Corcione; E Cossu; M Federico; L Marotti; L Martincich; P Panizza; F Podo; M Rosselli Del Turco; C Zuiani; C Alfano; M Bazzocchi; P Belli; S Bianchi; A Cilotti; M Calabrese; L Carbonaro; L Cortesi; C Di Maggio; A Del Maschio; A Esseridou; A Fausto; M Gennaro; R Girometti; R Ienzi; A Luini; S Manoukian; S Morassutt; D Morrone; J Nori; A Orlacchio; F Pane; P Panzarola; R Ponzone; G Simonetti; P Torricelli; G Valeri
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2008-10-16       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  Patterns of peripheral enhancement in breast masses: correlation of findings on contrast medium enhanced MRI with histologic features and tumor angiogenesis.

Authors:  L D Buadu; J Murakami; S Murayama; N Hashiguchi; S Sakai; S Toyoshima; K Masuda; S Kuroki; S Ohno
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1997 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.826

4.  Do the histologic features and results of breast cancer biomarker studies differ between core biopsy and surgical excision specimens?

Authors:  Chandra N Burge; Helena R Chang; Sophia K Apple
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 4.380

5.  Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features.

Authors:  P C Stomper; S Herman; D L Klippenstein; J S Winston; S B Edge; M A Arredondo; R V Mazurchuk; L E Blumenson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Prognostic value of contrast-enhanced MR mammography in patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  U Fischer; L Kopka; U Brinck; M Korabiowska; A Schauer; E Grabbe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Classification of hypervascularized lesions in CE MR imaging of the breast.

Authors:  F Baum; U Fischer; R Vosshenrich; E Grabbe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2002-02-02       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Trastuzumab after adjuvant chemotherapy in HER2-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Martine J Piccart-Gebhart; Marion Procter; Brian Leyland-Jones; Aron Goldhirsch; Michael Untch; Ian Smith; Luca Gianni; Jose Baselga; Richard Bell; Christian Jackisch; David Cameron; Mitch Dowsett; Carlos H Barrios; Günther Steger; Chiun-Shen Huang; Michael Andersson; Moshe Inbar; Mikhail Lichinitser; István Láng; Ulrike Nitz; Hiroji Iwata; Christoph Thomssen; Caroline Lohrisch; Thomas M Suter; Josef Rüschoff; Tamás Suto; Victoria Greatorex; Carol Ward; Carolyn Straehle; Eleanor McFadden; M Stella Dolci; Richard D Gelber
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-10-20       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene.

Authors:  D J Slamon; G M Clark; S G Wong; W J Levin; A Ullrich; W L McGuire
Journal:  Science       Date:  1987-01-09       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer.

Authors:  C I Li; D J Uribe; J R Daling
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2005-10-31       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  5 in total

1.  Utility of second-look ultrasound in the management of incidental enhancing lesions detected by breast MR imaging.

Authors:  G Carbognin; V Girardi; C Calciolari; A Brandalise; F Bonetti; A Russo; R Pozzi Mucelli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2010-06-23       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Characterizing and eliminating errors in enhancement and subtraction artifacts in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI: Chemical shift artifact of the third kind.

Authors:  Jamal J Derakhshan; Elizabeth S McDonald; Evan S Siegelman; Mitchell D Schnall; Felix W Wehrli
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 4.668

3.  Cone-beam Breast Computed Tomography: CT Density Does Not Reflect Proliferation Potential and Receptor Expression of Breast Carcinoma.

Authors:  Susanne Wienbeck; Uwe Fischer; Christina Perske; Andreas Wienke; Hans Jonas Meyer; Joachim Lotz; Alexey Surov
Journal:  Transl Oncol       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 4.243

Review 4.  Breast Cancer Subtypes and Quantitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systemic Review.

Authors:  Toshiki Kazama; Taro Takahara; Jun Hashimoto
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-28

5.  Body mass index and serum proteomic profile in breast cancer and healthy women: a prospective study.

Authors:  Vito Michele Garrisi; Antonio Tufaro; Paolo Trerotoli; Italia Bongarzone; Michele Quaranta; Vincenzo Ventrella; Stefania Tommasi; Gianluigi Giannelli; Angelo Paradiso
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-30       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.