Association between parenchymal enhancement of the contralateral breast in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and outcome of patients with unilateral invasive breast cancer

Radiology

Volumn 276, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 675-685

  Van Der Velden, Bas H M ^a,b   Dmitriev, Ivan ^a,b   Loo, Claudette E ^c   Pijnappel, Ruud M ^b   Gilhuijs, Kenneth G A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^c ANTONI VAN LEEUWENHOEK HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER GRADING; CANCER HORMONE THERAPY; CANCER SURVIVAL; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURVIVAL TIME; TUMOR INVASION; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA; IMAGE QUALITY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SURVIVAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84940870558     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.15142192     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Denley H, Pinder SE, Elston CW, Lee AH, Ellis IO. Preoperative assessment of prognostic factors in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2001;54(1):20-24.
2. Nicholson RI, Johnston SR. Endocrine therapy-current benefits and limitations. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005;93(Suppl 1): S3-S10.
3. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Bronskill M, Yaffe MJ, Duric N, Minkin S. Breast tissue composition and susceptibility to breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102(16):1224-1237.
4. Gierach GL, Ichikawa L, Kerlikowske K, et al. Relationship between mammographic density and breast cancer death in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104(16):1218-1227.
5. King V, Brooks JD, Bernstein JL, Reiner AS, Pike MC, Morris EA. Background parenchymal enhancement at breast MR imaging and breast cancer risk. Radiology 2011; 260(1):50-60.
6. Hattangadi J, Park C, Rembert J, et al. Breast stromal enhancement on MRI is associated with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190(6):1630-1636.
7. Kim SA, Cho N, Ryu EB, et al. Background parenchymal signal enhancement ratio at preoperative MR imaging: association with subsequent local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ after breast conservation surgery. Radiology 2014;270(3):699-707.
8. Deurloo EE, Peterse JL, Rutgers EJ, Besnard AP, Muller SH, Gilhuijs KG. Additional breast lesions in patients eligible for breastconserving therapy by MRI: impact on preoperative management and potential benefit of computerised analysis. Eur J Cancer 2005;41(10):1393-1401.
9. Elshof LE, Rutgers EJ, Deurloo EE, et al. A practical approach to manage additional lesions at preoperative breast MRI in patients eligible for breast conserving therapy: results. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010; 124(3):707-715.
10. Pengel KE, Loo CE, Wesseling J, Pijnappel RM, Rutgers EJ, Gilhuijs KG. Avoiding preoperative breast MRI when conventional imaging is sufficient to stage patients eligible for breast conserving therapy. Eur J Radiol 2014; 83(2):273-278.
11. Pengel KE, Loo CE, Teertstra HJ, et al. The impact of preoperative MRI on breast-conserving surgery of invasive cancer: a comparative cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009;116(1):161-169.
12. Bloom HJ, Richardson WW. Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer; a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer 1957;11(3):359-377.
13. Tustison NJ, Avants BB, Cook PA, et al. N4ITK: improved N3 bias correction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010;29(6):1310-1320.
14. Dmitriev ID, Loo CE, Vogel WV, Pengel KE, Gilhuijs KG. Fully automated deformable registration of breast DCE-MRI and PET/CT. Phys Med Biol 2013;58(4):1221-1233.
15. Gilhuijs KG, Giger ML, Bick U. Computerized analysis of breast lesions in three dimensions using dynamic magnetic-resonance imaging. Med Phys 1998;25(9):1647-1654.
16. Klifa C, Carballido-Gamio J, Wilmes L, et al. Quantification of breast tissue index from MR data using fuzzy clustering. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2004;3:1667-1670.
17. Haybittle JL, Blamey RW, Elston CW, et al. A prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1982;45(3):361-366.
18. Hudis CA, Barlow WE, Costantino JP, et al. Proposal for standardized definitions for efficacy end points in adjuvant breast cancer trials: the STEEP system. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(15):2127-2132.
19. King V, Gu Y, Kaplan JB, Brooks JD, Pike MC, Morris EA. Impact of menopausal status on background parenchymal enhancement and fibroglandular tissue on breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2012;22(12):2641-2647.
20. Scaranelo AM, Carrillo MC, Fleming R, Jacks LM, Kulkarni SR, Crystal P. Pilot study of quantitative analysis of background enhancement on breast MR images: association with menstrual cycle and mammographic breast density. Radiology 2013;267(3):692-700.
21. Clemons M, Goss P. Estrogen and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2001;344(4):276-285.
22. Published correction appears in N Engl J Med 2001;344(23):1804.
23. Kim J, Han W, Moon HG, et al. Breast density change as a predictive surrogate for response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in hormone receptor positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2012;14(4):R102.
24. Morris EA. Diagnostic breast MR imaging: current status and future directions. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45(5):863-880, vii.
25. DeMartini WB, Liu F, Peacock S, Eby PR, Gutierrez RL, Lehman CD. Background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: impact on diagnostic performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198(4):W373-W380.
26. Hambly NM, Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Brennan S, Morris EA. Background parenchymal enhancement on baseline screening breast MRI: impact on biopsy rate and short-interval follow-up. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196(1):218-224.
27. Hylton N. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as an imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol 2006;24(20):3293-3298.
28. Nabavizadeh N, Klifa C, Newitt D, et al. Topographic enhancement mapping of the cancer-associated breast stroma using breast MRI. Integr Biol (Camb) 2011;3(4):490-496.
29. Chen JH, Yu H, Lin M, Mehta RS, Su MY. Background parenchymal enhancement in the contralateral normal breast of patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy measured by DCE-MRI. Magn Reson Imaging 2013;31(9):1465-1471.
30. Jones EF, Sinha SP, Newitt DC, et al. MRI enhancement in stromal tissue surrounding breast tumors: association with recurrence free survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. PLoS ONE 2013;8(5):e61969.
31. Loo CE, Straver ME, Rodenhuis S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging response monitoring of breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy: relevance of breast cancer subtype. J Clin Oncol 2011;29(6):660-666.
32. Gribbestad IS, Nilsen G, Fjøsne HE, Kvinnsland S, Haugen OA, Rinck PA. Comparative signal intensity measurements in dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR mammography. J Magn Reson Imaging 1994;4(3):477-480.