| Literature DB >> 35372023 |
Changyun Luo1, Li Lu2, Weifu Zhang3, Xiangqi Li4, Ping Zhou5, Zhangshen Ran1.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the diagnostic value of shear wave elastography examination (SWE) on axillary node metastasis (ANM) in breast cancer, this study aimed to evaluate the correlation between the SWE features and different molecular types of breast cancer, and to check the elastic modulus differences among the molecular types.Entities:
Keywords: breast cancer; diagnosis; metastasis; molecular classification; shear wave elastography
Year: 2022 PMID: 35372023 PMCID: PMC8968036 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.846568
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Criteria and evaluation of CUE in the diagnosis of lymph node status.
| Index | 1 point | 2 point |
|---|---|---|
| Aspect ratio | >2 | <2 |
| Short axis diameter | <7 mm | >7 mm |
| Lymphatic hilus | Yes | No |
| Cortical thickness | <3 mm | >3 mm |
| Blood flow type | Gate type | Peripheral type or mixed type |
Comparison of CUE and SWE elastic modulus between the two groups with/without ANM.
| No lymph node metastases | Lymph node metastases | T/X2 | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lymph node size | 1.36 ± 0.51 | 2.16 ± 2.63 | -2.218 | 0.029 |
| Aspect ratio >2 | 41 (73.2%) | 13 (22.4%) | ||
| <2 | 15 (26.8%) | 45 (77.6%) | 29.49 | 0 |
| Short axis diameter <7 | 44 | 19 | 24.18 | 0 |
| >7 | 12 | 39 | ||
| Lymphatic hilus | 26 | 26 | 0.029 | 0.864 |
| No lymphatic hilus | 30 | 32 | ||
| Gate type | 28 | 21 | 2.21 | 0.137 |
| Not gate type | 28 | 37 | ||
| Cortical thickness <3 | 11 | 13 | 0.13 | 0.717 |
| >3 | 45 | 45 | ||
| Emax | 24.68 ± 18.91 | 77.68 ± 48.06 | -7.693 | 0 |
| Emean | 17.34 ± 14.13 | 58.33 ± 42.31 | -6.887 | 0 |
| Emin | 13.35 ± 10.39 | 39.77 ± 36.79 | -5.255 | 0 |
Comparison of diagnostic efficacy of CUE, SWE, and their conjunctive use in ANM.
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value | Accuracy | Kappa | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CUE | 72.40% | 58.90% | 64.60% | 67.30% | 65.80% | 0.314 |
| SWE | 70.70% | 76.70% | 75.90% | 71.60% | 73.60% | 0.474 |
| CUE+SWE | 79.30% | 82.10% | 82.10% | 79.30% | 80.70% | 0.616 |
Figure 1Three ROC curves for the sensitivity and specificity of CUE, SWE, and their conjunctive use in ANM diagnosis.
Figure 2Three ROC curves for the sensitivity and specificity of the Emean, Emax, and Emin in the application of ANM diagnosis.
Variance analysis of SWE elastic modulus and different molecular subtypes of breast cancer.
| Emax (Kpa) | Emean (Kpa) | Emin (Kpa) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Luminal A type | 119.04 ± 17.63 | 88.07 ± 23.02 | 59.53 ± 24.19 |
| Luminal B type | 112.43 ± 14.62 | 80.97 ± 11.65 | 51.07 ± 10.29 |
| HER-2 high expression | 119.51 ± 21.60 | 89.19 ± 21.03 | 60.50 ± 20.82 |
| Triple-negative | 126.87 ± 16.45 | 98.14 ± 17.53 | 68.90 ± 16.53 |
| F | 1.372 | 1.714 | 1.719 |
| P | 0.257 | 0.171 | 0.169 |