OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to correlate the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value of breast cancer with prognostic factors. METHODS: 335 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma not otherwise specified (IDC NOS) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who underwent breast MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging were included in this study. ADC of breast cancer was calculated using two b factors (0 and 1000 s mm(-2)). Mean ADCs of IDC NOS and DCIS were compared and evaluated. Among cases of IDC NOS, mean ADCs were compared with lymph node status, size and immunochemical prognostic factors using Student's t-test. ADC was also correlated with histological grade using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Mean ADC of IDC NOS was significantly lower than that of DCIS (p<0.001). However, the mean ADC of histological grade of IDC NOS was not significantly different (p=0.564). Mean ADC of oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive or progesterone receptor (PR)-positive cancer was significantly lower than that of ER-negative or PR-negative cancer (p=0.003 vs p=0.032). Mean ADC of Ki-67 index-positive cancer was significantly lower than that of Ki-67 index-negative cancer (p=0.028). Mean ADC values of cancers with increased microvascular density (MVD) were significantly lower than those of cancer with no MVD increase (p=0.009). No correlations were observed between mean ADC value and human growth factor receptor 2 expression, tumour size and lymph node metastasis. CONCLUSION: Low ADC value was correlated with positive expression of ER, PR, increased Ki-67 index, and increased MVD of breast cancer.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to correlate the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value of breast cancer with prognostic factors. METHODS: 335 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma not otherwise specified (IDC NOS) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who underwent breast MRI with diffusion-weighted imaging were included in this study. ADC of breast cancer was calculated using two b factors (0 and 1000 s mm(-2)). Mean ADCs of IDC NOS and DCIS were compared and evaluated. Among cases of IDC NOS, mean ADCs were compared with lymph node status, size and immunochemical prognostic factors using Student's t-test. ADC was also correlated with histological grade using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Mean ADC of IDC NOS was significantly lower than that of DCIS (p<0.001). However, the mean ADC of histological grade of IDC NOS was not significantly different (p=0.564). Mean ADC of oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive or progesterone receptor (PR)-positive cancer was significantly lower than that of ER-negative or PR-negative cancer (p=0.003 vs p=0.032). Mean ADC of Ki-67 index-positive cancer was significantly lower than that of Ki-67 index-negative cancer (p=0.028). Mean ADC values of cancers with increased microvascular density (MVD) were significantly lower than those of cancer with no MVD increase (p=0.009). No correlations were observed between mean ADC value and human growth factor receptor 2 expression, tumour size and lymph node metastasis. CONCLUSION: Low ADC value was correlated with positive expression of ER, PR, increased Ki-67 index, and increased MVD of breast cancer.
Authors: L D Buadu; J Murakami; S Murayama; N Hashiguchi; S Sakai; K Masuda; S Toyoshima; S Kuroki; S Ohno Journal: Radiology Date: 1996-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: V Ludovini; A Sidoni; L Pistola; G Bellezza; V De Angelis; S Gori; A M Mosconi; G Bisagni; R Cherubini; A Rosa Bian; C Rodinò; R Sabbatini; B Mazzocchi; E Bucciarelli; M Tonato; M Colozza Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: C S Schouten; P de Graaf; E Bloemena; B I Witte; B J M Braakhuis; R H Brakenhoff; C R Leemans; J A Castelijns; R de Bree Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Nita Amornsiripanitch; Vicky T Nguyen; Habib Rahbar; Daniel S Hippe; Vijayakrishna K Gadi; Mara H Rendi; Savannah C Partridge Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Hubert Bickel; Katja Pinker; Stephan Polanec; Heinrich Magometschnigg; Georg Wengert; Claudio Spick; Wolfgang Bogner; Zsuzsanna Bago-Horvath; Thomas H Helbich; Pascal Baltzer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sebastian Bickelhaupt; Jana Tesdorff; Frederik Bernd Laun; Tristan Anselm Kuder; Wolfgang Lederer; Susanne Teiner; Klaus Maier-Hein; Heidi Daniel; Anne Stieber; Stefan Delorme; Heinz-Peter Schlemmer Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Paolo Belli; Melania Costantini; Enida Bufi; Giuseppe Giovanni Giardina; Pierluigi Rinaldi; Gianluca Franceschini; Lorenzo Bonomo Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2014-08-06 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Gene Young Cho; Linda Moy; Sungheon G Kim; Steven H Baete; Melanie Moccaldi; James S Babb; Daniel K Sodickson; Eric E Sigmund Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-11-28 Impact factor: 5.315