Jing Zhang1, Song Gao2, Qiaojin Zheng1, Ye Kang3, Jianyi Li4, Shuo Zhang5, Cong Shang1, Xueying Tan1, Weidong Ren1, Yan Ma1. 1. Department of Ultrasound, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 2. Department of Clinical Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 3. Department of Pathology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 4. Department of Breast Surgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China. 5. Department of Neurology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the ability of tumor stiffness, tumor blood flow, and Ki-67 expression alone or in combination in predicting the pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 145 breast cancer patients treated with NACT. Tumor stiffness (maximum stiffness (Emax), mean stiffness (Emean)), blood score (BS), and their relative changes, were evaluated before (t0), during (t1-t5), and at the end of NACT (t6) by shear-wave elastography and optical imaging. Ki-67 expression was quantitatively evaluated by immunohistochemistry using core biopsy specimens obtained before NACT. Pathological responses were evaluated by residual cancer burden. The ability of tumor stiffness, BS, Ki-67, and predRCB-which combined ΔEmean (t2) (the relative changes in Emean after the second NACT cycle), BS2 (BS after the second NACT cycle), and Ki-67-in predicting tumor responses was compared using receiver operating characteristic curves and the Z-test. RESULTS: Tumor stiffness and BS decreased during NACT. ΔEmean (t2), BS2, and Ki-67 had better predictive performance than other indexes in identifying a favorable response (AUC = 0.82, 0.81, and 0.80) and resistance responses (AUC = 0.85, 0.79, and 0.84), with no significant differences between the three (p > 0.05). PredRCB had better predictive performance than any parameter alone for a favorable response (AUC = 0.90) and resistance (AUC = 0.93). CONCLUSION: Tumor stiffness, BS, and Ki-67 expression showed good and similar abilities for predicting the pathological response to NACT, and predRCB was a significantly better predictor than each index alone. These results may help design therapeutic strategies for breast cancer patients undergoing NACT.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the ability of tumor stiffness, tumor blood flow, and Ki-67 expression alone or in combination in predicting the pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 145 breast cancer patients treated with NACT. Tumor stiffness (maximum stiffness (Emax), mean stiffness (Emean)), blood score (BS), and their relative changes, were evaluated before (t0), during (t1-t5), and at the end of NACT (t6) by shear-wave elastography and optical imaging. Ki-67 expression was quantitatively evaluated by immunohistochemistry using core biopsy specimens obtained before NACT. Pathological responses were evaluated by residual cancer burden. The ability of tumor stiffness, BS, Ki-67, and predRCB-which combined ΔEmean (t2) (the relative changes in Emean after the second NACT cycle), BS2 (BS after the second NACT cycle), and Ki-67-in predicting tumor responses was compared using receiver operating characteristic curves and the Z-test. RESULTS: Tumor stiffness and BS decreased during NACT. ΔEmean (t2), BS2, and Ki-67 had better predictive performance than other indexes in identifying a favorable response (AUC = 0.82, 0.81, and 0.80) and resistance responses (AUC = 0.85, 0.79, and 0.84), with no significant differences between the three (p > 0.05). PredRCB had better predictive performance than any parameter alone for a favorable response (AUC = 0.90) and resistance (AUC = 0.93). CONCLUSION: Tumor stiffness, BS, and Ki-67 expression showed good and similar abilities for predicting the pathological response to NACT, and predRCB was a significantly better predictor than each index alone. These results may help design therapeutic strategies for breast cancer patients undergoing NACT.
Authors: Anna Marie Maier; Jörg Heil; Aba Harcos; Hans-Peter Sinn; Geraldine Rauch; Lorenz Uhlmann; Christina Gomez; Anne Stieber; Annika Funk; Richard G Barr; André Hennigs; Fabian Riedel; Benedikt Schäfgen; Sarah Hug; Frederik Marmé; Christof Sohn; Michael Golatta Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: M Elizabeth H Hammond; Daniel F Hayes; Mitch Dowsett; D Craig Allred; Karen L Hagerty; Sunil Badve; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Glenn Francis; Neil S Goldstein; Malcolm Hayes; David G Hicks; Susan Lester; Richard Love; Pamela B Mangu; Lisa McShane; Keith Miller; C Kent Osborne; Soonmyung Paik; Jane Perlmutter; Anthony Rhodes; Hironobu Sasano; Jared N Schwartz; Fred C G Sweep; Sheila Taube; Emina Emilia Torlakovic; Paul Valenstein; Giuseppe Viale; Daniel Visscher; Thomas Wheeler; R Bruce Williams; James L Wittliff; Antonio C Wolff Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 5.534
Authors: Janet C Miller; Homer H Pien; Dushyant Sahani; A Gregory Sorensen; James H Thrall Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Athanasia Pavlopoulou; Yavuz Oktay; Konstantinos Vougas; Maria Louka; Constantinos E Vorgias; Alexandros G Georgakilas Journal: Cancer Lett Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 8.679
Authors: Thomas R Cox; Demelza Bird; Ann-Marie Baker; Holly E Barker; Melisa W-Y Ho; Georgina Lang; Janine T Erler Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2013-01-23 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Nara P Pereira; Carla Curi; Cynthia A B T Osório; Elvira F Marques; Fabiana B Makdissi; Katja Pinker; Almir G V Bitencourt Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-11-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: A Goldhirsch; E P Winer; A S Coates; R D Gelber; M Piccart-Gebhart; B Thürlimann; H-J Senn Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2013-08-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Zyad M Almutlaq; Daniel J Wilson; Sarah E Bacon; Nisha Sharma; Samuel Stephens; Tatendashe Dondo; David L Buckley Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2022-02-14 Impact factor: 5.119