Alana A Lewin1, Sungheon Gene Kim2, James S Babb2, Amy N Melsaether2, Jason McKellop2, Melanie Moccaldi3, Ana Paula Klautau Leite4, Linda Moy2. 1. Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, 660 First Avenue 4th floor, New York, New York 10016. Electronic address: Alana.Amarosa@nyumc.org. 2. Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, 660 First Avenue 4th floor, New York, New York 10016. 3. New York University Cancer Institute, 160 East 34th Street 2nd floor, New York, New York 10016. 4. Department of Radiology, New York University School of Medicine, 660 First Avenue 4th floor, New York, New York 10016; Department of Radiology, Hospital das Clínicas, School of Medicine, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether quantitative kinetic analysis of lesions and background parenchyma in breast magnetic resonance imaging can elucidate differences between BRCA carriers and sporadic controls with high risk for breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine BRCA and 59 control cases (49 benign, 10 malignant) were examined in this study. Principal component analysis was applied for quantitative analysis of dynamic signal in background parenchyma (B) and lesion (L) in terms of initial enhancement ratio (IER) and delayed enhancement ratio (DER). RESULTS: Control B-IER, B-DER, L-IER, and L-DER were higher than BRCA cases in all women and in women with benign lesions; statistically significant differences in B-IER and B-DER (all women: P = 0.02 and P = 0.02, respectively; benign only: P = 0.005 and P = 0.005, respectively). In the control cohort, B-IER and B-DER were higher in the premenopausal women than in the postmenopausal women (P = 0.013 and 0.003, respectively), but not in the BRCA cohort; this led to significant differences in B-IER and B-DER between the control and the BRCA groups in the premenopausal women (P = 0.01 and 0.01, respectively) but not in the postmenopausal women. CONCLUSION: Results suggest possible differences in the vascular properties of background parenchyma between BRCA carriers and noncarriers and its association with menopausal status.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether quantitative kinetic analysis of lesions and background parenchyma in breast magnetic resonance imaging can elucidate differences between BRCA carriers and sporadic controls with high risk for breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine BRCA and 59 control cases (49 benign, 10 malignant) were examined in this study. Principal component analysis was applied for quantitative analysis of dynamic signal in background parenchyma (B) and lesion (L) in terms of initial enhancement ratio (IER) and delayed enhancement ratio (DER). RESULTS: Control B-IER, B-DER, L-IER, and L-DER were higher than BRCA cases in all women and in women with benign lesions; statistically significant differences in B-IER and B-DER (all women: P = 0.02 and P = 0.02, respectively; benign only: P = 0.005 and P = 0.005, respectively). In the control cohort, B-IER and B-DER were higher in the premenopausal women than in the postmenopausal women (P = 0.013 and 0.003, respectively), but not in the BRCA cohort; this led to significant differences in B-IER and B-DER between the control and the BRCA groups in the premenopausal women (P = 0.01 and 0.01, respectively) but not in the postmenopausal women. CONCLUSION: Results suggest possible differences in the vascular properties of background parenchyma between BRCA carriers and noncarriers and its association with menopausal status.
Authors: Robert A Smith; Debbie Saslow; Kimberly Andrews Sawyer; Wylie Burke; Mary E Costanza; W Phil Evans; Roger S Foster; Edward Hendrick; Harmon J Eyre; Steven Sener Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2003 May-Jun Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Alana R Amarosa; Jason McKellop; Ana Paula Klautau Leite; Melanie Moccaldi; Tess V Clendenen; James S Babb; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Linda Moy; Sungheon Kim Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-05-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: F D Gilliland; N Joste; P M Stauber; W C Hunt; R Rosenberg; G Redlich; C R Key Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-05-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Patricia A Mote; Jennifer A Leary; Kelly A Avery; Kerstin Sandelin; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Judy A Kirk; Christine L Clarke Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Geraldine J Liao; Leah C Henze Bancroft; Roberta M Strigel; Rhea D Chitalia; Despina Kontos; Linda Moy; Savannah C Partridge; Habib Rahbar Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-04-19 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Shandong Wu; Wendie A Berg; Margarita L Zuley; Brenda F Kurland; Rachel C Jankowitz; Robert Nishikawa; David Gur; Jules H Sumkin Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2016-07-22 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Michelle Zhang; Meredith Sadinski; Dana Haddad; Min Sun Bae; Danny Martinez; Elizabeth A Morris; Peter Gibbs; Elizabeth J Sutton Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 6.244