| Literature DB >> 29556301 |
Xiaokang Li1,2,3,4, Yaqing Li2,3,4,5, Ying Zhu1,2,3,4, Li Fu2,3,4,5, Peifang Liu1,2,3,4.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the association between enhancement patterns and parameters in contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) and microvessel distribution and histological prognostic tumor characteristics of breast cancer. Between September 2011 and April 2013, 109 breast lesions were prospectively analyzed, which were classified into Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System class 4-5 by conventional ultrasound. Before core-needle biopsy, CEUS examination was performed. Different enhancement patterns (homogeneous, peripheral and regional enhancement) were evaluated. Following CEUS, biopsies were performed at the same body positions under guidance of ultrasound. Parameters (wash-in time, peak intensity, time to peak, area under the time-intensity curve, ascending slope) of CEUS at corresponding puncture sites were recorded. Microvessel density (MVD) and pathological prognostic factors, including histological grade, lymph node status, tumor-node-metastasis stage, estrogen and progesterone receptor status, Ki-67 proliferative index and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 overexpression, were determined. Mann-Whitney U test, Spearman's rank-correlation test and independent-samples t-tests were used for evaluation. Core-needle biopsy or surgical resection specimens of 99 malignant breast lesions were included in the present study. Of the 99 malignant lesions, 44 lesions exhibited homogeneous enhancement, 43 exhibited peripheral enhancement and 12 exhibited regional enhancement. Lesions with peripheral enhancement exhibited a higher peripheral/central ratio of MVD compared with lesions with homogeneous enhancement (P<0.001). Peak intensity and ascending slope ratios of tumor periphery/center were correlated with the corresponding MVD ratios (P=0.017 and P=0.016, respectively). MVD ratio was positively correlated with histological grade (P=0.003). In conclusion, the enhancement patterns and parameters of CEUS may not only reflect the microvessel distribution but also indirectly indicate the histological grade of breast cancer.Entities:
Keywords: breast cancer; contrast media; histological grade; microvessel density; ultrasound
Year: 2018 PMID: 29556301 PMCID: PMC5844090 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2018.8078
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Histopathological types of breast cancer among patients.
| Diagnosis | n | % |
|---|---|---|
| DCIS | 3 | 3.0 |
| Invasive carcinoma | 96 | 97.0 |
| IDC-NOS | 83 | 83.8 |
| Mucinous carcinoma | 2 | 2.0 |
| Apocrine carcinoma | 2 | 2.0 |
| Neuroendocrine carcinoma | 1 | 1.0 |
| Mixed type carcinoma | 8 | 8.1 |
Histological types were defined according to the World Health Organization classification. DCIS, ductal carcinoma in situ; IDC-NOS, invasive ductal carcinoma-not otherwise specified.
Clinicopathological characteristics of patients with breast cancer.
| Characteristics | n |
|---|---|
| n | 99 |
| Age, years[ | 53.0±10.8 |
| Tumor size, mm[ | 22.7±9.4 |
| Histological grade, n (%)[ | |
| I | 8 (9.6) |
| II | 57 (68.7) |
| III | 18 (21.7) |
| TNM stage, n (%) | |
| Tis | 3 (3.0) |
| T1 | 42 (42.4) |
| T2 | 51 (51.5) |
| T3 | 3 (3.0) |
| Lymph node, n (%) | |
| Negative | 63 (63.6) |
| Positive | 36 (36.4) |
| ER status, n (%) | |
| Negative | 29 (29.3) |
| Positive | 70 (70.7) |
| PR status, n (%) | |
| Negative | 32 (32.3) |
| Positive | 67 (67.7) |
| HER2 status, n (%) | |
| Negative | 64 (64.6) |
| Positive | 35 (35.4) |
| Ki67 proliferative index, n (%) | |
| Low | 25 (25.3) |
| High | 74 (74.7) |
Only invasive ductal carcinoma-not otherwise specified type cases were included in histological grade analysis.
Mean±SD. TNM, tumor-node-metastasis; ER, estrogen; PR, progesterone; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2.
Figure 1.Homogenous enhancement. (A) Contrast-enhanced sonogram indicating a homogeneous enhancement mass. Core-needle biopsy from the (B) periphery and (C) center of the lesion. Immunohistochemical staining for CD34 indicates a similar distribution of microvessel density between the (D) periphery and (E) center of the lesion (original magnification, ×200).
Figure 2.Peripheral enhancement. (A) Contrast-enhanced sonogram indicating a peripheral enhancement mass. Core-needle biopsy from the (B) periphery and (C) center of the lesion. Immunohistochemical staining for CD34 indicates (D) increased MVD in the periphery of the lesion, with (E) decreased MVD in the center of the lesion (original magnification, ×200). MVD, microvessel density.
Figure 3.Regional enhancement. (A) Contrast-enhanced sonogram indicating a regional enhancement mass. Core-needle biopsy from an area of the lesion with (B) no enhancement and (C) obvious enhancement. Immunohistochemical staining for CD34 indicates decreased MVD in the (D) non-enhanced area of the lesion, with increased MVD in the (E) obviously enhanced area of the lesion (original magnification, ×200). MVD, microvessel density.
Association between MVD ratio and contrast-enhanced ultrasound patterns in breast cancer.
| MVD value, median (range) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enhancement pattern | n | Periphery | Center | MVD ratio of periphery to center, median (range) | Z | P-value |
| Homogeneous enhancement | 44 | 69 (12–157) | 59 (11–155) | 1.04 (0.90–2.13) | −3.604 | <0.001 |
| Peripheral enhancement | 43 | 66 (14–330) | 53 (8–223) | 1.23 (1.00–4.50) | ||
| Regional enhancement[ | 12 | |||||
Due to irregular regional enhancement, these 12 cases were excluded from statistical analysis. MVD, microvessel density.
Correlation between microvessel density ratio and contrast-enhanced ultrasound perfusion parameters in breast cancer (n=87 cases).
| Statistic | Peak intensity ratio | Time to peak ratio | Area under the time-intensity curve ratio | Ascending slope ratio | Wash-in time ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| r-value | 0.267 | −0.061 | 0.159 | 0.271 | −0.050 |
| P-value | 0.017 | 0.591 | 0.163 | 0.016 | 0.660 |
Analyzed using Spearman's rank-correlation test.
Association between MVD ratio and histological characteristics of breast cancer.
| MVD value, median (range) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prognostic factors | Peripheral | Central | MVD ratio periphery to center, median (range) | R- or T-value | P-value |
| Histologic grade | 0.364[ | 0.003[ | |||
| I | 57 (25–136) | 47 (24–63) | 1.05 (1.04–1.61) | ||
| II | 67 (45–88) | 59 (33–74) | 1.09 (1.02–1.29) | ||
| III | 67(37–114) | 38 (15–96) | 1.72 (1.29–2.08) | ||
| TNM stage | 0.041[ | 0.751[ | |||
| T1 | 59 (37–79) | 55 (30–66) | 1.09 (1.03–1.32) | ||
| T2 | 70 (64–92) | 60 (36–75) | 1.07 (1.02–1.41) | ||
| T3 | 51 (41–61) | 35 (23–49) | 1.50 (1.24–1.75) | ||
| Lymph node status | −0.339[ | 0.735[ | |||
| Negative | 67 (53–88) | 58 (34–68) | 1.05 (1.02–1.35) | ||
| Positive | 70 (42–95) | 56 (31–78) | 1.17 (1.03–1.48) | ||
| ER status | 0.052[ | 0.958[ | |||
| Negative | 79 (59–117) | 61 (41–104) | 1.18 (1.03–1.70) | ||
| Positive | 67 (42–82) | 53 (31–69) | 1.10 (1.02–1.33) | ||
| PR status | −0.119[ | 0.906[ | |||
| Negative | 76 (57–118) | 60 (40–106) | 1.17 (1.03–1.68) | ||
| Positive | 66 (42–82) | 51 (29–68) | 1.10 (1.02–1.33) | ||
| HER2 status | 1.725[ | 0.088[ | |||
| Negative | 67 (48–94) | 53 (32–67) | 1.16 (1.03–1.62) | ||
| Positive | 73 (43–92) | 65 (34–90) | 1.06 (1.02–1.31) | ||
| Ki67 proliferative index | 1.308[ | 0.195[ | |||
| Low | 67 (34–77) | 29 (21–57) | 1.13 (1.01–1.61) | ||
| High | 67 (52–81) | 58 (38–68) | 1.10 (1.02–1.44) | ||
r-value
t-value
analyzed using Spearman's rank-correlation test
analyzed using independent-samples t-test. MVD, microvessel density; TNM, tumor-node-metastasis; ER, estrogen; PR, progesterone; HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2.