Literature DB >> 29696443

Relationship between functional imaging and immunohistochemical markers and prediction of breast cancer subtype: a PET/MRI study.

Mariarosaria Incoronato1, Anna Maria Grimaldi2, Carlo Cavaliere2, Marianna Inglese2, Peppino Mirabelli2, Serena Monti2, Umberto Ferbo3, Emanuele Nicolai2, Andrea Soricelli2,4, Onofrio Antonio Catalano5, Marco Aiello2, Marco Salvatore2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine if functional parameters extracted from the hybrid positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) correlate with the immunohistochemical markers of breast cancer (BC) lesions, to assess their ability to predict BC subtype.
METHODS: This prospective study was approved by the institution's Ethics Committee, and all patients provided written informed consent. A total of 50 BC patients at diagnosis underwent PET/MRI before pharmacological and surgical treatment. For each primary lesion, the following data were extracted: morphological data including tumour-node-metastasis stage and lesion size; apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC); perfusion data including forward volume transfer constant (Ktrans), reverse efflux volume transfer constant (Kep) and extravascular extracellular space volume (Ve); and metabolic data including standardized uptake value (SUV), lean body mass (SUL), metabolic tumour volume and total lesion glycolysis. Immunohistochemical reports were used to determine receptor status (oestrogen, progesterone, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2), cellular differentiation status (grade), and proliferation index (Ki67) of the tumour lesions. Correlation studies (Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman's test), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and multivariate analysis were performed.
RESULTS: Association studies were performed to assess the correlations between imaging and histological prognostic markers of BC. Imaging biomarkers, which significantly correlated with biological markers, were selected to perform ROC curve analysis to determine their ability to discriminate among BC subtypes. SUVmax, SUVmean and SUL were able to discriminate between luminal A and luminal B subtypes (AUCSUVmean = 0.799; AUCSUVmax = 0.833; AUCSUL = 0.813) and between luminal A and nonluminal subtypes (AUCSUVmean = 0.926; AUCSUVmax = 0.917; AUCSUL = 0.945), and the lowest SUV and SUL values were associated with the luminal A subtype. Kepmax was able to discriminate between luminal A and luminal B subtypes (AUC = 0.779), and its highest values were associated with the luminal B subtype. Ktransmax (AUC = 0.881) was able to discriminate between luminal A and nonluminal subtypes, and the highest perfusion values were associated with the nonluminal subtype. In addition, ADC (AUC = 0.877) was able to discriminate between luminal B and nonluminal subtypes, and the lowest ADCmean values were associated with the luminal B subtype. Multivariate analysis was performed to develop a prognostic model, and the best predictive model included Ktransmax and SUVmax parameters.
CONCLUSION: Using multivariate analysis of both PET and MRI parameters, a prognostic model including Ktransmax and SUVmax was able to predict the tumour subtype in 38 of 49 patients (77.6%, p < 0.001), with higher accuracy for the luminal B subtype (86.2%).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Imaging parameters; Immunohistochemical markers; PET/MRI

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29696443     DOI: 10.1007/s00259-018-4010-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


  53 in total

1.  Correlation of breast cancer subtypes, based on estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2, with functional imaging parameters from ⁶⁸Ga-RGD PET/CT and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT.

Authors:  Hai-Jeon Yoon; Keon Wook Kang; In Kook Chun; Nariya Cho; Seock-Ah Im; Sunjoo Jeong; Song Lee; Kyeong Cheon Jung; Yun-Sang Lee; Jae Min Jeong; Dong Soo Lee; June-Key Chung; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Correlation of high 18F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer.

Authors:  David Groheux; Sylvie Giacchetti; Jean-Luc Moretti; Raphael Porcher; Marc Espié; Jacqueline Lehmann-Che; Anne de Roquancourt; Anne-Sophie Hamy; Caroline Cuvier; Laetitia Vercellino; Elif Hindié
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-11-06       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Comparison of whole-body PET/CT and PET/MRI in breast cancer patients: lesion detection and quantitation of 18F-deoxyglucose uptake in lesions and in normal organ tissues.

Authors:  Leonardo Pace; Emanuele Nicolai; Angelo Luongo; Marco Aiello; Onofrio A Catalano; Andrea Soricelli; Marco Salvatore
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2013-11-23       Impact factor: 3.528

4.  Staging performance of whole-body DWI, PET/CT and PET/MRI in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast.

Authors:  Onofrio Antonio Catalano; Dania Daye; Alberto Signore; Carlo Iannace; Mark Vangel; Angelo Luongo; Marco Catalano; Mazzeo Filomena; Luigi Mansi; Andrea Soricelli; Marco Salvatore; Niccolo Fuin; Ciprian Catana; Umar Mahmood; Bruce Robert Rosen
Journal:  Int J Oncol       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 5.650

5.  18F-FDG uptake in breast cancer correlates with immunohistochemically defined subtypes.

Authors:  Hye Ryoung Koo; Jeong Seon Park; Keon Wook Kang; Nariya Cho; Jung Min Chang; Min Sun Bae; Won Hwa Kim; Su Hyun Lee; Mi Young Kim; Jin You Kim; Mirinae Seo; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-10-05       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Enhancement parameters on dynamic contrast enhanced breast MRI: do they correlate with prognostic factors and subtypes of breast cancers?

Authors:  Ji Youn Kim; Sung Hun Kim; Yun Ju Kim; Bong Joo Kang; Yeong Yi An; A Won Lee; Byung Joo Song; Yong Soo Park; Han Bi Lee
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 2.546

7.  Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between MR imaging and pathologic findings.

Authors:  Takayoshi Uematsu; Masako Kasami; Sachiko Yuen
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Utility of (18)F FDG-PET/CT for predicting prognosis of luminal-type breast cancer.

Authors:  Kenjiro Aogi; Takayuki Kadoya; Yoshifumi Sugawara; Sachiko Kiyoto; Hideo Shigematsu; Norio Masumoto; Morihito Okada
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Potential of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in the Characterization of Malignant, Benign, and Healthy Breast Tissues and Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Uma Sharma; Rani G Sah; Khushbu Agarwal; Rajinder Parshad; Vurthaluru Seenu; Sandeep R Mathur; Smriti Hari; Naranamangalam R Jagannathan
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2016-05-23       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 10.  Radiogenomic Analysis of Oncological Data: A Technical Survey.

Authors:  Mariarosaria Incoronato; Marco Aiello; Teresa Infante; Carlo Cavaliere; Anna Maria Grimaldi; Peppino Mirabelli; Serena Monti; Marco Salvatore
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 5.923

View more
  12 in total

1.  Quantitative parameters of MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in the prediction of breast cancer prognosis and molecular type: an original study.

Authors:  Pavel Borisovich Gelezhe; Ivan Andreevich Blokhin; Damir Ildarovich Marapov; Sergey Pavlovich Morozov
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2020-12-15

2.  Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of Different Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Hans-Jonas Meyer; Andreas Wienke; Alexey Surov
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Sigmoid model analysis of breast dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: Distinguishing between benign and malignant breast masses and breast cancer subtype prediction.

Authors:  Norikazu Koori; Tosiaki Miyati; Naoki Ohno; Hiroko Kawashima; Hiroko Nishikawa
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-05-20       Impact factor: 2.243

Review 4.  Integrated imaging and molecular analysis to decipher tumor microenvironment in the era of immunotherapy.

Authors:  Jia Wu; Aaron T Mayer; Ruijiang Li
Journal:  Semin Cancer Biol       Date:  2020-12-05       Impact factor: 17.012

Review 5.  MR Imaging-Histology Correlation by Tailored 3D-Printed Slicer in Oncological Assessment.

Authors:  D Baldi; M Aiello; A Duggento; M Salvatore; C Cavaliere
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 6.  Microbiome-Microbial Metabolome-Cancer Cell Interactions in Breast Cancer-Familiar, but Unexplored.

Authors:  Edit Mikó; Tünde Kovács; Éva Sebő; Judit Tóth; Tamás Csonka; Gyula Ujlaki; Adrienn Sipos; Judit Szabó; Gábor Méhes; Péter Bai
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 6.600

7.  Predicting aggressive histopathological features in esophageal cancer with positron emission tomography using a deep convolutional neural network.

Authors:  Joe Chao-Yuan Yeh; Wei-Hsiang Yu; Cheng-Kun Yang; Ling-I Chien; Ko-Han Lin; Wen-Sheng Huang; Po-Kuei Hsu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-01

8.  Relationship between 18F-FDG PET/CT Semi-Quantitative Parameters and International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Classification in Lung Adenocarcinomas.

Authors:  Lihong Bu; Ning Tu; Ke Wang; Ying Zhou; Xinli Xie; Xingmin Han; Huiqin Lin; Hongyan Feng
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 3.500

9.  A Complex Radiomic Signature in Luminal Breast Cancer from a Weighted Statistical Framework: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Rossana Castaldo; Nunzia Garbino; Carlo Cavaliere; Mariarosaria Incoronato; Luca Basso; Renato Cuocolo; Leonardo Pace; Marco Salvatore; Monica Franzese; Emanuele Nicolai
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-15

10.  Correlation between histogram-based DCE-MRI parameters and 18F-FDG PET values in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: Evaluation in primary tumors and metastatic nodes.

Authors:  Antonello Vidiri; Emma Gangemi; Emanuela Ruberto; Rosella Pasqualoni; Rosa Sciuto; Giuseppe Sanguineti; Alessia Farneti; Maria Benevolo; Francesca Rollo; Francesca Sperati; Filomena Spasiano; Raul Pellini; Simona Marzi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.