Naoko Mori1, Shunji Mugikura2, Chiaki Takasawa2, Minoru Miyashita3, Akiko Shimauchi2, Hideki Ota2, Takanori Ishida3, Atsuko kasajima4, Kei Takase2, Tetsuya Kodama5, Shoki Takahashi2. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Seiryo 1-1, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan. naokomori7127@gmail.com. 2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Seiryo 1-1, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan. 3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Seiryo 1-1, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan. 4. Department of Pathology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Seiryo 1-1, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan. 5. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Seiryo 1-1, Sendai, 980-8574, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether visual assessment of T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) or an apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) could predict lymphovascular invasion (LVI) status in cases with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and thirty-six patients with 136 lesions underwent MRI. Visual assessment of T2WI, tumour-ADC, peritumoral maximum-ADC and the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio (the ratio between them) were compared with LVI status of surgical specimens. RESULTS: No significant relationship was found between LVI and T2WI. Tumour-ADC was significantly lower in the LVI-positive (n = 77, 896 ± 148 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s) than the LVI-negative group (n = 59, 1002 ± 163 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s; p < 0.0001). Peritumoral maximum-ADC was significantly higher in the LVI-positive (1805 ± 355 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s) than the LVI-negative group (1625 ± 346 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s; p = 0.0003). Peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was significantly higher in the LVI-positive (2.05 ± 0.46) than the LVI-negative group (1.65 ± 0.40; p < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the area under the curve (AUC) of the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was the highest (0.81). The most effective threshold for the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was 1.84, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 77% (59/77), 76% (45/59), 81% (59/73) and 71% (45/63), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio can assist in predicting LVI status on preoperative imaging. KEY POINTS: • Tumour ADC was significantly lower in LVI-positive than LVI-negative breast cancer. • Peritumoral maximum-ADC was significantly higher in LVI-positive than LVI-negative breast cancer. • Peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was significantly higher in LVI-positive breast cancer. • Diagnostic performance of the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was highest for positive LVI. • Peritumour-tumour ADC ratio showed higher diagnostic ability in postmenopausal than premenopausal patients.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether visual assessment of T2-weighted imaging (T2WI) or an apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) could predict lymphovascular invasion (LVI) status in cases with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and thirty-six patients with 136 lesions underwent MRI. Visual assessment of T2WI, tumour-ADC, peritumoral maximum-ADC and the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio (the ratio between them) were compared with LVI status of surgical specimens. RESULTS: No significant relationship was found between LVI and T2WI. Tumour-ADC was significantly lower in the LVI-positive (n = 77, 896 ± 148 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s) than the LVI-negative group (n = 59, 1002 ± 163 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s; p < 0.0001). Peritumoral maximum-ADC was significantly higher in the LVI-positive (1805 ± 355 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s) than the LVI-negative group (1625 ± 346 × 10(-6) mm(2)/s; p = 0.0003). Peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was significantly higher in the LVI-positive (2.05 ± 0.46) than the LVI-negative group (1.65 ± 0.40; p < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the area under the curve (AUC) of the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was the highest (0.81). The most effective threshold for the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was 1.84, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 77% (59/77), 76% (45/59), 81% (59/73) and 71% (45/63), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio can assist in predicting LVI status on preoperative imaging. KEY POINTS: • Tumour ADC was significantly lower in LVI-positive than LVI-negative breast cancer. • Peritumoral maximum-ADC was significantly higher in LVI-positive than LVI-negative breast cancer. • Peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was significantly higher in LVI-positive breast cancer. • Diagnostic performance of the peritumour-tumour ADC ratio was highest for positive LVI. • Peritumour-tumour ADC ratio showed higher diagnostic ability in postmenopausal than premenopausal patients.
Authors: T Sugahara; Y Korogi; M Kochi; I Ikushima; Y Shigematu; T Hirai; T Okuda; L Liang; Y Ge; Y Komohara; Y Ushio; M Takahashi Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Anneleen Reynders; Olivier Brouckaert; Ann Smeets; Annouschka Laenen; Emi Yoshihara; Frederik Persyn; Giuseppe Floris; Karin Leunen; Frederic Amant; Julie Soens; Chantal Van Ongeval; Philippe Moerman; Ignace Vergote; Marie-Rose Christiaens; Gracienne Staelens; Koen Van Eygen; Alain Vanneste; Peter Van Dam; Cecile Colpaert; Patrick Neven Journal: Breast Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: Viviana Galimberti; Bernard F Cole; Stefano Zurrida; Giuseppe Viale; Alberto Luini; Paolo Veronesi; Paola Baratella; Camelia Chifu; Manuela Sargenti; Mattia Intra; Oreste Gentilini; Mauro G Mastropasqua; Giovanni Mazzarol; Samuele Massarut; Jean-Rémi Garbay; Janez Zgajnar; Hanne Galatius; Angelo Recalcati; David Littlejohn; Monika Bamert; Marco Colleoni; Karen N Price; Meredith M Regan; Aron Goldhirsch; Alan S Coates; Richard D Gelber; Umberto Veronesi Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-03-11 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: I de Mascarel; F Bonichon; M Durand; L Mauriac; G MacGrogan; I Soubeyran; V Picot; A Avril; J M Coindre; M Trojani Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1998-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Manuela Durando; Lucas Gennaro; Gene Y Cho; Dilip D Giri; Merlin M Gnanasigamani; Sujata Patil; Elizabeth J Sutton; Joseph O Deasy; Elizabeth A Morris; Sunitha B Thakur Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 3.528