MRI phenotype of breast cancer: Kinetic assessment for molecular subtypes

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 920-924

  Blaschke, Eric ^a   Abe, Hiroyuki ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

breast cancer; dynamic contrast MRI; HER2; luminal A B; triple negative

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; GADODIAMIDE; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; CONTRAST MEDIUM; GADOLINIUM PENTETATE;

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER GRADING; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DRUG UPTAKE; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; HUMAN; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TREATMENT PLANNING; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER; TUMOR VOLUME; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; KINETICS; METABOLIC CLEARANCE RATE; METABOLISM; MIDDLE AGED; PAGET NIPPLE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PHENOTYPE; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; GADOLINIUM DTPA; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; KINETICS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; METABOLIC CLEARANCE RATE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHENOTYPE; PRECISION MEDICINE; RECEPTOR, ERBB-2; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84941994882     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24884     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bluemke DA, Gatsonis CA, Chen MH, et al., Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy. JAMA 2004; 292: 2735-2742.
2. Esserman L, Hylton N, Yassa L, Barclay J, Frankel S, Sickles E,. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: evidence for improved preoperative staging. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 110-119.
3. Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK,. MR imaging of the ipsilateral breast in women with percutaneously proven breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 901-910.
4. Peters NH, Borel Rinkes IH, Zuithoff NP, Mali WP, Moons KG, Peeters PH,. Meta-analysis of MR imaging in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 2008; 246: 116-124.
5. El Khouli RH, Macura KJ, Jacobs MA, et al., Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: quantitative method for kinetic curve type assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 193: W295-300.
6. Li SP, Padhani AR, Taylor NJ, et al., Vascular characterisation of triple negative breast carcinomas using dynamic MRI. Eur Radiol 2011; 21: 1364-1373.
7. Abramson RG, Li X, Hoyt TL, et al., Early assessment of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by semi-quantitative analysis of high-temporal resolution DCE-MRI: preliminary results. Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 31: 1457-1464.
8. Abramson RG, Arlinghaus LR, Weis JA, et al., Current and emerging quantitative magnetic resonance imaging methods for assessing and predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant therapy. Breast Cancer (London) 2012;2012: 139-154.
9. Bhooshan N, Giger ML, Jansen SA, Li H, Lan L, Newstead GM,. Cancerous breast lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: computerized characterization for image-based prognostic markers. Radiology 2010; 254: 680-690.
10. Golden DI, Lipson JA, Telli ML, Ford JM, Rubin DL,. Qualitative and quantitative image-based biomarkers of therapeutic response in triple-negative breast cancer. AMIA Summits Transl Sci Proc 2013;2013: 62.
11. Ashraf AB, Daye D, Gavenonis S, et al., Identification of intrinsic imaging phenotypes for breast cancer tumors: preliminary associations with gene expression profiles. Radiology 2014: 131375.
12. Brenton JD, Carey LA, Ahmed AA, Caldas C,. Molecular classification and molecular forecasting of breast cancer: ready for clinical application? J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7350-7360.
13. Network CGA,. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2012; 490: 61-70.
14. Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al., Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001; 98: 10869-10874.
15. Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Marotti J, et al., Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2008; 10: R67.
16. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, et al., Strategies for subtypes-dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1736-1747.
17. Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH, et al., ACR BI-RADS magnetic resonance imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2013.
18. Giger ML, Karssemeijer N, Schnabel JA,. Breast image analysis for risk assessment, detection, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2013; 15: 327-357.
19. Hsiang DJ, Yamamoto M, Mehta RS, et al., Predicting nodal status using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with and without sequential trastuzumab. Arch Surg 2007; 142: 855-861; discussion 860-851.
20. Yamaguchi K, Abe H, Newstead GM, et al., Intratumoral heterogeneity of the distribution of kinetic parameters in breast cancer: comparison based on the molecular subtypes of invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2014.
21. Brown LF, Berse B, Jackman RW, et al., Expression of vascular permeability factor (vascular endothelial growth factor) and its receptors in breast cancer. Hum Pathol 1995; 26: 86-91.