| Literature DB >> 31262334 |
Chao You1, Jianwei Li2, Wenxiang Zhi3, Yanqiong Chen1, Wentao Yang4, Yajia Gu5, Weijun Peng6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the imaging biomarkers of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive breast cancer in comparison to other molecular subtypes and to determine the feasibility of identifying hormone receptor (HR) status and lymph node metastasis status using volumetric-tumour histogram-based analysis through intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) and non-Gaussian diffusion.Entities:
Keywords: Breast cancer; HER2-positive; Histogram-based analysis; Intravoxel incoherent motion; Non-Gaussian diffusion
Year: 2019 PMID: 31262334 PMCID: PMC6604303 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-019-1911-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Fig. 1Workflow for the histogram analysis. a Foreground seed points were manually drawn on the axial view of the original ADC map (b value = 1000 s/mm2), and on the multiparametric diffusion parameter maps within the same ROI. b The 3D segmentation was created on the three multiplane reconstruction planes, and DCE images were accessed to verify the lesion boundaries
Clinicopathological characteristics between the HER2- positive and HER2-negative groups
| Variable | Overall (n = 148) | HER2(−) (n = 74) | HER2(+) (n = 74) | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 49.68 ± 10.64 | 50.47 ± 11.15 | 49.04 ± 10.11 | 0.414 |
| Diameter (cm) | 3.42 ± 1.37 | 3.35 ± 1.20 | 3.48 ± 1.52 | 0.736 |
| Affected side | ||||
| Right | 64 (43.2) | 30 (40.5) | 34 (45.9) | 0.507 |
| Left | 84 (56.4) | 44 (59.5) | 40 (54.1) | |
| T stage | ||||
| 1 | 9 (6.0) | 5 (6.7) | 4 (5.4) | 0.235 |
| 2 | 55 (37.2) | 26 (35.1) | 29 (39.2) | |
| 3 | 30 (20.3) | 11 (14.9) | 19 (25.7) | |
| 4 | 54 (36.5) | 32 (43.2) | 22 (29.7) | |
| N stage | ||||
| 0 | 20 (13.5) | 11 (14.9) | 9 (12.1) | 0.967 |
| 1 | 64 (43.2) | 31 (41.9) | 33 (44.6) | |
| 2 | 26 (17.6) | 13 (17.5) | 13 (17.6) | |
| 3 | 38 (25.7) | 19 (25.7) | 19 (25.7) | |
| M stage | ||||
| 0 | 136 (91.9) | 68 (91.9) | 68 (91.9) | 1.00 |
| 1 | 12 (8.1) | 6 (8.1) | 6 (8.1) | |
| cTNM | ||||
| 1 | 4 (2.7) | 2 (2.7) | 2 (2.7) | 0.685 |
| 2 | 44 (29.7) | 25 (33.8) | 19 (25.7) | |
| 3 | 79 (53.4) | 36 (48.6) | 43 (58.1) | |
| 4 | 21 (14.2) | 11 (14.9) | 10 (13.5) | |
| Ki 67 | ||||
| 0.37 ± 0.20 | 0.35 ± 0.23 | 0.38 ± 0.18 | 0.360 |
Numerical data are presented as the mean ± SD. Nonnumerical data are presented as the number of patients (percentage). The p value was analysed between HER2-negative group and the HER2-positive group
HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, cTNM clinical TNM stage
Fig. 2a Boxplots illustrating a comparison of MKentropy indexes between the HER2-positive and HER2-negative groups. b Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the differentiation of HER2-positive and HER2-negative groups using MK entropy for the entire tumour volume
Fig. 3a Boxplots illustrating a comparison of MD 5th percentile indexes between HR-positive and HR-negative groups within the HER2 positive breast cancer patients. b Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for differentiating HR status using MD 5th percentile for the entire tumour volume
Fig. 4a Boxplots illustrating a comparison of MD entropy indexes between the lymph node-positive and -negative groups within HER2 positive breast cancer patients. b Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for differentiating lymph node status using MD entropy for the entire tumour volume
Fig. 5A 48-year-old female with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer, with hormone receptor (HR) -negative status and lymph node -positive status. a The 3D segmentation of the lesion was created on the three multiplane reconstruction planes, and DCE images were accessed to verify the lesion boundaries. b MK and MD maps overlaid with colour maps of ADC values and the histogram of whole-tumour MK and MD maps. The MK entropy was 1.83, the MD 5th percentile was 776.64 and the MD entropy was 2.13
Spearman’s correlation coefficients (r) of clinical TNM stage, Ki 67 and with combined IVIM and non-Gaussian diffusion parameters
| ADC | Dt | f | D* | MK | MD | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cTNM | Ki67 | cTNM | Ki67 | cTNM | Ki67 | cTNM | Ki67 | cTNM | Ki67 | cTNM | Ki67 | |
| 50th | − 0.61 | − 0.23* | − 0.04 | − 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.22* | − 0.14 | − 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.14 | − 0.05 | − 0.60 |
| 5th | − 0.23 | − 0.14 | − 0.02 | − 0.08 | 0.04 | 0.13 | − 0.04 | 0.01 | 0.05 | 0.18* | − 0.02 | − 0.13 |
| 95th | − 0.40 | − 0.24* | − 0.07 | − 0.21* | 0.04 | 0.20* | − 0.12 | − 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.07 | − 0.10 | − 0.05 |
| Skewness | 0.28* | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.16 | − 0.02 | − 0.20* | 0.05 | − 0.01 | − 0.12 | − 0.07 | 0.16 | − 0.04 |
| Kurtosis | 0.21* | 0.19* | 0.04 | 0.09 | − 0.01 | − 0.25* | 0.09 | − 0.02 | − 0.12 | − 0.13 | 0.06 | − 0.01 |
| Contrast | − 0.13 | − 0.12 | − 0.12 | − 0.03 | − 0.02 | 0.23* | − 0.10 | − 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.12 | − 0.01 | 0.12 |
| Entropy | − 0.14 | − 0.13 | − 0.01 | − 0.04 | 0.113 | 0.06 | − 0.02 | 0.21 | 0.024 | 0.11 | 0.05 | − 0.12 |
ADC apparent diffusion coefficient, Dt true diffusion coefficient, f perfusion fraction diffusion, D* pseudo-diffusion coefficient, MK mean kurtosis, MD mean diffusivity
*p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant