Heterogeneity of triple-negative breast cancer: mammographic, US, and MR imaging features according to androgen receptor expression

European Radiology

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 419-427

  Bae, Min Sun ^a   Park, So Yeon ^a   Song, Sung Eun ^a   Kim, Won Hwa ^a   Lee, Su Hyun ^a   Han, Wonshik ^a   Park, In Ae ^a   Noh, Dong Young ^a   Moon, Woo Kyung ^a  

^a Seoul National University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Androgen receptor; Immunohistochemistry; Mammography; MR imaging; Triple negative breast cancer

Indexed keywords

ANDROGEN RECEPTOR; KI 67 ANTIGEN; AR PROTEIN, HUMAN; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MAMMOGRAPHY SYSTEM; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER; ULTRASOUND TRANSDUCER; BIOSYNTHESIS; CANCER STAGING; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; METABOLISM; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST NEOPLASMS; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOMARKERS, TUMOR; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM STAGING; RECEPTORS, ANDROGEN; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST NEOPLASMS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 84920769314     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: 14321084     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-014-3419-z     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Lin NU, Vanderplas A, Hughes ME et al (2012) Clinicopathologic features, patterns of recurrence, and survival among women with triple-negative breast cancer in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Cancer 118:5463–5472
2. Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L et al (2007) The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 13:2329–2334
3. Shah SP, Roth A, Goya R et al (2012) The clonal and mutational evolution spectrum of primary triple-negative breast cancers. Nature 486:395–399
4. Lehmann BD, Bauer JA, Chen X et al (2011) Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest 121:2750–2767
5. Prat A, Adamo B, Cheang MC, Anders CK, Carey LA, Perou CM (2013) Molecular characterization of basal-like and non-basal-like triple-negative breast cancer. Oncologist 18:123–133
6. Turner NC, Reis-Filho JS (2013) Tackling the diversity of triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 19:6380–6388
7. Masuda H, Baggerly KA, Wang Y et al (2013) Differential response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy among 7 triple-negative breast cancer molecular subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 19:5533–5540
8. Yu KD, Zhu R, Zhan M et al (2013) Identification of prognosis-relevant subgroups in patients with chemoresistant triple-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 19:2723–2733
9. Shah PD, Gucalp A, Traina TA (2013) The role of the androgen receptor in triple-negative breast cancer. Womens Health (Lond Engl) 9:351–360
10. Vera-Badillo FE, Templeton AJ, de Gouveia P et al (2014) Androgen receptor expression and outcomes in early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 106:1–11
11. Park S, Koo J, Park HS et al (2010) Expression of androgen receptors in primary breast cancer. Ann Oncol 21:488–492
12. Hu R, Dawood S, Holmes MD et al (2011) Androgen receptor expression and breast cancer survival in postmenopausal women. Clin Cancer Res 17:1867–1874
13. Thike AA, Yong-Zheng Chong L, Cheok PY et al (2014) Loss of androgen receptor expression predicts early recurrence in triple-negative and basal-like breast cancer. Mod Pathol 27:352–360
14. Gucalp A, Tolaney S, Isakoff SJ et al (2013) Phase II trial of bicalutamide in patients with androgen receptor-positive, estrogen receptor-negative metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 19:5505–5512
15. Luck AA, Evans AJ, James JJ et al (2008) Breast carcinoma with basal phenotype: mammographic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:346–351
16. Krizmanich-Conniff KM, Paramagul C, Patterson SK et al (2012) Triple receptor-negative breast cancer: imaging and clinical characteristics. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:458–464
17. Ryu EB, Chang JM, Seo M, Kim SA, Lim JH, Moon WK (2014) Tumour volume doubling time of molecular breast cancer subtypes assessed by serial breast ultrasound. Eur Radiol 24:2227–2235
18. Uematsu T, Kasami M, Yuen S (2009) Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between MR imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology 250:638–647
19. Sung JS, Jochelson MS, Brennan S et al (2013) MR imaging features of triple-negative breast cancers. Breast J 19:643–649
20. Chen JH, Agrawal G, Feig B et al (2007) Triple-negative breast cancer: MRI features in 29 patients. Ann Oncol 18:2042–2043
21. American College of Radiology (2003) Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System (BIRADS). American College of Radiology, Reston
22. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M et al (2010) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:2784–2795
23. Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A’Hern R et al (2011) Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:1656–1664
24. Keam B, Im SA, Lee KH et al (2011) Ki-67 can be used for further classification of triple negative breast cancer into two subtypes with different response and prognosis. Breast Cancer Res 13:R22
25. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:118–145
26. Elston CW, Ellis IO (1991) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 19:403–410
27. Bae MS, Moon WK, Chang JM et al (2013) Mammographic features of calcifications in DCIS: correlation with oestrogen receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. Eur Radiol 23:2072–2078
28. Bullier B, MacGrogan G, Bonnefoi H et al (2013) Imaging features of sporadic breast cancer in women under 40 years old: 97 cases. Eur Radiol 23:3237–3245
29. Costantini M, Belli P, Distefano D et al (2012) Magnetic resonance imaging features in triple-negative breast cancer: comparison with luminal and HER2-overexpressing tumors. Clin Breast Cancer 12:331–339
30. Bae MS, Seo M, Kim KG, Park IA, Moon WK (2014) Quantitative MRI morphology of invasive breast cancer: correlation with immunohistochemical biomarkers and subtypes. Acta Radiol
31. Greenwood HI, Heller SL, Kim S, Sigmund EE, Shaylor SD, Moy L (2013) Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breasts: review of MR imaging features. Radiographics 33:1569–1588
32. Agoff SN, Swanson PE, Linden H, Hawes SE, Lawton TJ (2003) Androgen receptor expression in estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer: immunohistochemical, clinical, and prognostic associations. Am J Clin Pathol 120:725–731
33. Aho M, Irshad A, Ackerman SJ et al (2013) Correlation of sonographic features of invasive ductal mammary carcinoma with age, tumor grade, and hormone-receptor status. J Clin Ultrasound 41:10–17
34. Wojcinski S, Stefanidou N, Hillemanns P, Degenhardt F (2013) The biology of malignant breast tumors has an impact on the presentation in ultrasound: an analysis of 315 cases. BMC Womens Health 13:47
35. McNamara KM, Yoda T, Miki Y et al (2013) Androgenic pathway in triple negative invasive ductal tumors: its correlation with tumor cell proliferation. Cancer Sci 104:639–646
36. Lehmann BD, Pietenpol JA (2014) Identification and use of biomarkers in treatment strategies for triple-negative breast cancer subtypes. J Pathol 232:142–150
37. Mukhtar RA, Yau C, Rosen M et al (2013) Clinically meaningful tumor reduction rates vary by prechemotherapy MRI phenotype and tumor subtype in the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657). Ann Surg Oncol 20:3823–3830
38. Yi A, Cho N, Im SA et al (2013) Survival outcomes of breast cancer patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy: association with dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging with computer-aided evaluation. Radiology 268:662–672
39. Yamamoto S, Maki DD, Korn RL, Kuo MD (2012) Radiogenomic analysis of breast cancer using MRI: a preliminary study to define the landscape. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:654–663
40. Jaffe CC (2012) Imaging and genomics: is there a synergy? Radiology 264:329–331