Literature DB >> 26244152

How to use magnetic resonance imaging following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer.

Elissa R Price1, Jasmine Wong1, Rita Mukhtar1, Nola Hylton1, Laura J Esserman1.   

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is highly sensitive in identifying residual breast cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and consequently is a commonly used imaging modality in locally advanced breast cancer patients. In these patients, tumor response is an important prognostic indicator. However, discrepancies between MRI findings and surgical pathology are well documented. Overestimation of residual disease by MRI may result in greater surgery than is actually required while underestimation may result in insufficient surgery. Thus, it is important to understand when MRI findings are reliable and when they are less accurate. MRI most accurately predicts pathology in triple negative, Her2 positive and hormone receptor negative tumors, especially if they are of a solid imaging phenotype. In these cases, post-NAC MRI is highly reliable for surgical planning. Hormone receptor positive cancers and those demonstrating non mass enhancement show lower concordance with surgical pathology, making surgical guidance more nebulous in these cases. Radiologists and surgeons must assess MRI response to NAC in the context of tumor subtype. Indiscriminate interpretations will prevent MRI from achieving its maximum potential in the pre-operative setting.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomarkers; Breast; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Phenotypes

Year:  2015        PMID: 26244152      PMCID: PMC4517335          DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v3.i7.607

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Clin Cases        ISSN: 2307-8960            Impact factor:   1.337


  37 in total

1.  Magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of pathologic response in patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment for operable breast cancer. Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium trial 017.

Authors:  Jennifer F De Los Santos; Alan Cantor; Keith D Amos; Andres Forero; Mehra Golshan; Janet K Horton; Clifford A Hudis; Nola M Hylton; Kandace McGuire; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Ingrid M Meszoely; Rita Nanda; E Shelley Hwang
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-02-21       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Magnetic resonance imaging response monitoring of breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy: relevance of breast cancer subtype.

Authors:  Claudette E Loo; Marieke E Straver; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Sara H Muller; Jelle Wesseling; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-01-10       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging for assessing tumor response in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with molecular biomarker profile.

Authors:  Aida Kuzucan; Jeon-Hor Chen; Shadfar Bahri; Rita S Mehta; Philip M Carpenter; Peter T Fwu; Hon J Yu; David J B Hsiang; Karen T Lane; John A Butler; Stephen A Feig; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Immunohistochemical surrogate markers of breast cancer molecular classes predicts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a single institutional experience with 359 cases.

Authors:  Rohit Bhargava; Sushil Beriwal; David J Dabbs; Umut Ozbek; Atilla Soran; Ronald R Johnson; Adam M Brufsky; Barry C Lembersky; Gretchen M Ahrendt
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  The prognostic importance of triple negative breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Hakan Mersin; Emin Yildirim; Ugur Berberoglu; Kaptan Gülben
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2008-05-01       Impact factor: 4.380

6.  Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  W Fraser Symmans; Florentia Peintinger; Christos Hatzis; Radhika Rajan; Henry Kuerer; Vicente Valero; Lina Assad; Anna Poniecka; Bryan Hennessy; Marjorie Green; Aman U Buzdar; S Eva Singletary; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Lajos Pusztai
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-09-04       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Evaluation with 3.0-T MR imaging: predicting the pathological response of triple-negative breast cancer treated with anthracycline and taxane neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Min Jung Kim; Eun-Kyung Kim; Seho Park; Hee Jung Moon; Seung Il Kim; Byeong-Woo Park
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 1.990

8.  Potential of reduction in total tumor volume measured with 3D-MRI as a prognostic factor for locally-advanced breast cancer patients treated with primary chemotherapy.

Authors:  Kenji Akazawa; Yasuhiro Tamaki; Tetsuya Taguchi; Yoshio Tanji; Yasuo Miyoshi; Seung Jim Kim; Kenzo Shimazu; Satsuki Ueda; Tetsu Yanagisawa; Noritsugu Okishiro; Mitsunobu Imazato; Kozuma Yasuyuki; Yoshinobu Sato; Shinichi Tamura; Shinzaburo Noguchi
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2008-10-13       Impact factor: 2.431

9.  Locally advanced breast cancer treated with primary chemotherapy: comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and pathologic evaluation of residual disease.

Authors:  G Trecate; E Ceglia; F Stabile; J D Tesoro-Tess; G Mariani; M Zambetti; R Musumeci
Journal:  Tumori       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug

10.  Clinically meaningful tumor reduction rates vary by prechemotherapy MRI phenotype and tumor subtype in the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657).

Authors:  Rita A Mukhtar; Christina Yau; Mark Rosen; Vickram J Tandon; Nola Hylton; Laura J Esserman
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 5.344

View more
  5 in total

1.  A computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) scheme for pretreatment prediction of pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI texture features.

Authors:  Valentina Giannini; Simone Mazzetti; Agnese Marmo; Filippo Montemurro; Daniele Regge; Laura Martincich
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Breast Cancer Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

Authors:  Giorgia Pasquero; Alessandra Surace; Antonio Ponti; Massimiliano Bortolini; Donatella Tota; Maria Piera Mano; Riccardo Arisio; Chiara Benedetto; Maria Grazia Baù
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2020 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  Intratumoral and peritumoral radiomics for the pretreatment prediction of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on breast DCE-MRI.

Authors:  Nathaniel M Braman; Maryam Etesami; Prateek Prasanna; Christina Dubchuk; Hannah Gilmore; Pallavi Tiwari; Donna Plecha; Anant Madabhushi
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 6.466

4.  Accuracy of breast magnetic resonance imaging in evaluating the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a study of 310 cases at a cancer center.

Authors:  Erika Marina Solla Negrão; Almir Galvão Vieira Bitencourt; Juliana Alves de Souza; Elvira Ferreira Marques
Journal:  Radiol Bras       Date:  2019 Sep-Oct

5.  Gene signature-based prediction of triple-negative breast cancer patient response to Neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Yanding Zhao; Evelien Schaafsma; Chao Cheng
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-07-21       Impact factor: 4.452

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.