Invasive breast cancer: Predicting disease recurrence by using high-spatial-resolution signal enhancement ratio imaging

Radiology

Volumn 248, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 79-87

  Li, Ka Loh ^a,c   Partridge, Savannah C ^b   Joe, Bonnie N ^a   Gibbs, Jessica E ^a   Lu, Ying ^a   Esserman, Laura J ^a   Hylton, Nola M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DOXORUBICIN; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE MEGLUMINE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER INFILTRATION; CANCER INVASION; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SIZE; CANCER SURVIVAL; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; COVARIANCE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HIGH SPATIAL RESOLUTION SIGNAL ENHANCEMENT RATIO; HUMAN; INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; RANK SUM TEST; RECURRENT CANCER; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; BREAST TUMOR; EVALUATION; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 47249101156     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2481070846     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Kelcz F, Santyr G. Gadolinium-enhanced breast MRI. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 1995;36:287-338.
2. Hulka CA, Smith BL, Sgroi DC, et al. Benign and malignant breast lesions: differentiation with echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 1995;197:33-38.
3. Stomper PC, Winston JS, Herman S, et al. Angiogenesis and dynamic MR imaging gadolinium enhancement of malignant and benign breast lesions. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997;45:39-46.
4. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Drew PJ, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast combined with analysis of contrast agent kinetics in the differentiation of primary breast tumours. Clin Radiol 1997;52:516-526.
5. Issa B, Buckley DL, Turnbull LW. Heterogeneity analysis of Gd-DTPA uptake: improvement in breast lesion differentiation. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999;23:615-621.
6. Liney GP, Gibbs P, Hayes C, Leach MO, Turnbull LW. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the differentiation of breast tumors: user-defined versus semi-automated region-of-interest analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:945-949.
7. Kuhl CK, Schild HH. Dynamic image interpretation of MRI of the breast. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:965-974.
8. Wedegartner U, Bick U, Wortler K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G. Differentiation between benign and malignant findings on MR-mammography: usefulness of morphological criteria. Eur Radiol 2001;11:1645-1650.
9. Furman-Haran E, Schechtman E, Kelcz F, Kirshenbaum K, Degani H. Magnetic resonance imaging reveals functional diversity of the vasculature in benign and malignant breast lesions. Cancer 2005;104:708-718.
10. Kuhl CK, Schild HH, Morakkabati N. Dynamic bilateral contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: trade-off between spatial and temporal resolution. Radiology 2005;236:789-800.
11. Hulka CA, Edmister WB, Smith BL, et al. Dynamic echo-planar imaging of the breast: experience in diagnosing breast carcinoma and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1997;205:837-842.
12. Bone B, Aspelin P, Bronge L, Veress B. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging as a prognostic indicator of breast cancer. Acta Radiol 1998;39:279-284.
13. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A. Dynamic MR imaging of invasive breast cancer: correlation with tumour grade and other histological factors. Br J Radiol 1997;70:446-451.
14. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, et al. Invasive breast carcinoma: analysis of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging enhancement features and cell proliferative activity determined by DNA S-phase percentage. Cancer 1996;77:1844-1849.
15. Bone B, Szabo BK, Perbeck LG, Veress B, Aspelin P. Can contrast-enhanced MR imaging predict survival in breast cancer? Acta Radiol 2003;44:373-378.
16. Su MY, Cheung YC, Fruehauf JP, et al. Correlation of dynamic contrast enhancement MRI parameters with microvessel density and VEGF for assessment of angiogenesis in breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2003;18:467-477.
17. Tuncbilek N, Karakas HM, Okten OO. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in determining histopathological prognostic factors of invasive breast cancers. Eur J Radiol 2005;53:199-205.
18. Padhani AR, Hayes C, Assersohn L, et al. Prediction of clinicopathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy at contrast-enhanced MR imaging: initial clinical results. Radiology 2006;239:361-374.
19. Hylton NM. Vascularity assessment of breast lesions with gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001;9:321-332, vi.
20. Furman-Haran E, Degani H. Parametric analysis of breast MRI. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002;26:376-386.
21. Esserman L, Hylton N, George T, Weidner N. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to assess tumor histopathology and angiogenesis in breast carcinoma. Breast J 1999;5:13-21.
22. Tofts PS. Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7:91-101.
23. Li KL, Henry RG, Wilmes LJ, et al. Kinetic assessment of breast tumors using high spatial resolution signal enhancement ratio (SER) imaging. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:572-581.
24. Knopp MV, Weiss E, Sinn HP, et al. Pathophysiologic basis of contrast enhancement in breast tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:260-266.
25. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999;211:101-110.
26. Liu PF, Debatin JF, Caduff RF, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy in dynamic contrast enhanced MRI of the breast by combined quantitative and qualitative analysis. Br J Radiol 1998;71:501-509.
27. Li KL, Wilmes LJ, Henry RG, et al. Heterogeneity in the angiogenic response of a BT474 human breast cancer to a novel vascular endothelial growth factor-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor: assessment by voxel analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;22:511-519.
28. Tofts PS, Berkowitz B, Schnall MD. Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd-DTPA enhancement in breast tumors using a permeability model. Magn Reson Med 1995;33:564-568.
29. Eliat PA, Dedieu V, Bertino C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging contrast-enhanced relaxometry of breast tumors: an MRI multicenter investigation concerning 100 patients. Magn Reson Imaging 2004;22:475-481.
30. Bottomley PA, Hardy CJ, Argersinger RE, Allen-Moore G.Areview of 1H nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation in pathology: are T1 and T2 diagnostic? Med Phys 1987;14:1-37.
31. Chung M, Chang HR, Bland KI, Wanebo HJ. Younger women with breast carcinoma have a poorer prognosis than older women. Cancer 1996;77:97-103.
32. Mayr NA, Taoka T, Yuh WT, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of radiation response in cervical cancer: regarding Hatano K et al. IJROBP 1999;45:399-344. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000;48:910-912.
33. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:223-232.
34. Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, et al. MRI measurements of breast tumor volume predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence-free survival. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:1774-1781.