| Literature DB >> 35845730 |
Huiliao He1, Guifan Zhang2, Haixian Zhou3, Chunyang Lin3, Qun Xu3, Ruixing Liu1, Beibei Yu1, Xiuping Zhou1, Zhejin Wang4, Zhihua Xu1, Lejing Lin3.
Abstract
The study investigates the diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound combined with the molybdenum target mode in breast cancer staging and the relationship between blood flow parameters and the expression of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) and factor 2 (IGF-2) and prognosis. A total of 96 patients admitted to hospital from January 2020 to January 2021 are included in the breast cancer group, and 58 patients admitted to our hospital during the same period are included in the control group, who are diagnosed with benign breast lesions. All patients receive clinicopathological diagnosis, ultrasound detection, and X-ray molybdenum detection. Ultrasound detection, molybdenum target detection, ultrasound combined with the molybdenum target detection mode, and clinicopathological diagnosis results are compared. B-ultrasound combined with the molybdenum target detection mode has high efficiency in diagnosing breast cancer and differentiating pathological stages. Besides, blood flow parameters of patients are closely related to IGF-1 and IGF-2, and IGF-1 and IGF-2 expressions are closely related to the prognosis of patients. Subsequent diagnosis of the disease degree of breast cancer patients can be carried out by ultrasound combined with the molybdenum target detection mode. In addition, the expression of IGF-1 and IGF-2 in patients can be monitored to improve the clinical diagnosis and treatment plan to improve the prognosis of patients, which has a high clinical application value and is worth promoting.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35845730 PMCID: PMC9249492 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9198626
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging ISSN: 1555-4309 Impact factor: 3.009
Comparison of molybdenum target detection and clinicopathological diagnosis results.
| Molybdenum target detection | Pathological diagnosis | Combined | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 phase | I phase | II phase | III phase | IV phase | ||
| 0 phase | 52 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 56 |
| I phase | 6 | 14 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 25 |
| II phase | 0 | 3 | 24 | 7 | 0 | 34 |
| III phase | 0 | 0 | 4 | 11 | 5 | 20 |
| IV phase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 15 | 19 |
| Combined | 58 | 21 | 33 | 22 | 20 | 154 |
Comparison of the ultrasonic detection mode and clinicopathological diagnosis results.
| Ultrasonic testing | Pathological diagnosis | Combined | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 phase | I phase | II phase | III phase | IV phase | ||
| 0 phase | 53 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 56 |
| I phase | 5 | 17 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 27 |
| II phase | 0 | 1 | 27 | 5 | 0 | 33 |
| III phase | 0 | 0 | 1 | 14 | 3 | 18 |
| IV phase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 17 | 20 |
| Combined | 58 | 21 | 33 | 22 | 20 | 154 |
Comparison of ultrasound combined with the molybdenum target detection mode and clinicopathological diagnosis results.
| The joint detection | Pathological diagnosis | Combined | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 phase | I phase | II phase | III phase | IV phase | ||
| 0 phase | 56 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 57 |
| I phase | 2 | 20 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 26 |
| II phase | 0 | 0 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 29 |
| III phase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 2 | 22 |
| IV phase | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 18 | 20 |
| Combined | 58 | 21 | 33 | 22 | 20 | 154 |
Comparison of blood flow parameters.
| Group | PI | RI |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| The control group ( | 1.19 ± 0.17 | 0.53 ± 0.06 | 14.27 ± 1.62 |
| Breast cancer group ( | 1.58 ± 0.23 | 0.75 ± 0.09 | 17.25 ± 2.03 |
|
| −11.192 | −16.520 | −9.497 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Comparison of IGF-1 and IGF-2 expression in each group.
| Group | IGF-1 ( | IGF-2 ( |
|---|---|---|
| Benign group ( | 27.37 ± 4.48 | 28.68 ± 4.72 |
| Breast cancer stages I-II group ( | 37.93 ± 5.82 | 48.36 ± 5.42 |
| Breast cancer stages III-IV group ( | 68.26 ± 6.15 | 70.61 ± 6.47 |
|
| −10.803 | −20.529 |
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 |
Prognosis of breast cancer patients in different groups at 12 months (n, %).
| Group | Recurrence/metastasis | Death |
|---|---|---|
| Breast cancer stages I-II group ( | 16 (29.63) | 6 (11.11) |
| Breast cancer stages III-IV group ( | 22 (40.74) | 15 (27.78) |
|
| 5.113 | 8.368 |
|
| 0.024 | 0.004 |
Figure 1Correlation of IGF-1 and IGF-2 expression. (a) Correlation between IGF-1 and PI. (b) Correlation between IGF-1 and RI. (c) Correlation between IGF-1 and Vmax. (d) Correlation between IGF-2 and PI. (e) Correlation between IGF-2 and RI. (f) Correlation between IGF-2 and Vmax.
Correlation between IGF-1, IGF-2, and prognosis of breast cancer patients.
| Incidence of adverse outcome | ||
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| IGF-1 | 0.735 | <0.001 |
| IGF-2 | 0.782 | <0.001 |