PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) provided by diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in predicting the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) at baseline in patients according to their breast tumour phenotypes. MATERIALS & METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board. One hundred eighteen consecutive women with locally advanced breast cancer who had undergone NACT followed by breast surgery were included. DWI was performed at 1.5 T less than 2 weeks before NACT. We studied the correlation between pretreatment ADC and response in pathology after surgery according to immunohistochemical features and intrinsic subtypes (luminal A, luminal B, HER2-enriched, and triple-negative tumours). RESULTS: After surgery, the pathologist recognized 24 complete responders (CRps) and 94 non-complete responders (NCRps). No difference was identified between the pretreatment ADCs of the CRp and NCRp patients. There were differences in pretreatment ADCs among the luminal A (1.001 ± 0.143 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), luminal B (0.983 ± 0.150 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), HER2-enriched (1.132 ± 0.216 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), and triple-negative (1.168 ± 0.245 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; P = 0.0003) tumour subtypes. In triple-negative tumours, the pretreatment ADC was higher in NCRp (1.060 ± 0.143 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) than in CRp patients (1.227 ± 0.271 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Pretreatment ADC can predict the response of breast cancer to NACT if tumour subtypes are considered. Key Points • Apparent diffusion coefficient helps clinicians to assess patients with breast cancer. • Pretreatment ADC is related to tumour grade and hormone receptor status. • Pretreatment ADC is lower in luminal A and B than in triple-negative tumours. • Pretreatment ADC is higher in complete than in non-complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) provided by diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in predicting the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) at baseline in patients according to their breast tumour phenotypes. MATERIALS & METHODS: This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board. One hundred eighteen consecutive women with locally advanced breast cancer who had undergone NACT followed by breast surgery were included. DWI was performed at 1.5 T less than 2 weeks before NACT. We studied the correlation between pretreatment ADC and response in pathology after surgery according to immunohistochemical features and intrinsic subtypes (luminal A, luminal B, HER2-enriched, and triple-negative tumours). RESULTS: After surgery, the pathologist recognized 24 complete responders (CRps) and 94 non-complete responders (NCRps). No difference was identified between the pretreatment ADCs of the CRp and NCRp patients. There were differences in pretreatment ADCs among the luminal A (1.001 ± 0.143 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), luminal B (0.983 ± 0.150 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), HER2-enriched (1.132 ± 0.216 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s), and triple-negative (1.168 ± 0.245 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; P = 0.0003) tumour subtypes. In triple-negative tumours, the pretreatment ADC was higher in NCRp (1.060 ± 0.143 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) than in CRppatients (1.227 ± 0.271 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s; P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Pretreatment ADC can predict the response of breast cancer to NACT if tumour subtypes are considered. Key Points • Apparent diffusion coefficient helps clinicians to assess patients with breast cancer. • Pretreatment ADC is related to tumour grade and hormone receptor status. • Pretreatment ADC is lower in luminal A and B than in triple-negative tumours. • Pretreatment ADC is higher in complete than in non-complete responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Authors: Savannah C Partridge; Jessica E Gibbs; Ying Lu; Laura J Esserman; Debasish Tripathy; Dulcy S Wolverton; Hope S Rugo; E Shelley Hwang; Cheryl A Ewing; Nola M Hylton Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Wolfgang Bogner; Stephan Gruber; Katja Pinker; Günther Grabner; Andreas Stadlbauer; Michael Weber; Ewald Moser; Thomas H Helbich; Siegfried Trattnig Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-07-31 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: R Prevos; M L Smidt; V C G Tjan-Heijnen; M van Goethem; R G Beets-Tan; J E Wildberger; M B I Lobbes Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-09-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Lisa A Carey; E Claire Dees; Lynda Sawyer; Lisa Gatti; Dominic T Moore; Frances Collichio; David W Ollila; Carolyn I Sartor; Mark L Graham; Charles M Perou Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: C M Perou; T Sørlie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; C A Rees; J R Pollack; D T Ross; H Johnsen; L A Akslen; O Fluge; A Pergamenschikov; C Williams; S X Zhu; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale; P O Brown; D Botstein Journal: Nature Date: 2000-08-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; Jared N Schwartz; Karen L Hagerty; D Craig Allred; Richard J Cote; Mitchell Dowsett; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Wedad M Hanna; Amy Langer; Lisa M McShane; Soonmyung Paik; Mark D Pegram; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Anthony Rhodes; Catharine Sturgeon; Sheila E Taube; Raymond Tubbs; Gail H Vance; Marc van de Vijver; Thomas M Wheeler; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-12-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J M Flaman; T Frebourg; V Moreau; F Charbonnier; C Martin; P Chappuis; A P Sappino; I M Limacher; L Bron; J Benhattar Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 1995-04-25 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: He Zhu; Lori R Arlinghaus; Jennifer G Whisenant; Ming Li; John C Gore; Thomas E Yankeelov Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Michael A Jacobs; Antonio C Wolff; Katarzyna J Macura; Vered Stearns; Ronald Ouwerkerk; Riham El Khouli; David A Bluemke; Richard Wahl Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2015-05
Authors: David C Newitt; Zheng Zhang; Jessica E Gibbs; Savannah C Partridge; Thomas L Chenevert; Mark A Rosen; Patrick J Bolan; Helga S Marques; Sheye Aliu; Wen Li; Lisa Cimino; Bonnie N Joe; Heidi Umphrey; Haydee Ojeda-Fournier; Basak Dogan; Karen Oh; Hiroyuki Abe; Jennifer Drukteinis; Laura J Esserman; Nola M Hylton Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 4.813