MR imaging features associated with distant metastasis-free survival of patients with invasive breast cancer: a case–control study
Tóm tắt
Preoperative breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging features of primary breast cancers may have the potential to act as prognostic biomarkers by providing morphologic and kinetic features representing inter- or intra-tumor heterogeneity. Recent radiogenomic studies reveal that several radiologist-annotated image features are associated with genes or signal pathways involved in tumor progression, treatment resistance, and distant metastasis (DM). We investigate whether preoperative breast MR imaging features are associated with worse DM-free survival in patients with invasive breast cancer. Of the 3536 patients with primary breast cancers who underwent preoperative MR imaging between 2003 and 2009, 147 patients with DM were identified and one-to-one matched with control patients (n = 147) without DM according to clinical–pathologic variables. Three radiologists independently reviewed the MR images of 294 patients, and the association of DM-free survival with MR imaging and clinical–pathologic features was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. Of MR imaging features, rim enhancement (hazard ratio [HR], 1.83 [95% confidence interval, CI 1.29, 2.51]; p = 0.001) and peritumoral edema (HR, 1.48 [95% CI 1.03, 2.11]; p = 0.032) were the significant features associated with worse DM-free survival. The significant MR imaging features, however, were different between breast cancer subtypes and stages. Preoperative breast MR imaging features of rim enhancement and peritumoral edema may be used as prognostic biomarkers that help predict DM risk in patients with breast cancer, thereby potentially enabling improved personalized treatment and monitoring strategies for individual patients.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG) (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet 365(9472):1687–1717
Weigelt B, Peterse JL, van’t Veer LJ (2005) Breast cancer metastasis: markers and models. Nat Rev Cancer 5(8):591–602
Page DL (1991) Prognosis and breast cancer. recognition of lethal and favourable prognostic types. Am J Surg Pathol 15(4):334–349
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(5):403–410
Slamon DJ, Leyland-Jones B, Shak S, Fuchs H, Paton V, Bajamonde A, Fleming T, Eiermann W, Wolter J, Pegram M, Baselga J, Norton L (2001) Use of chemotherapy plus a monoclonal antibody against HER2 for metastatic breast cancer that overexpresses HER2. N Engl J Med 344(11):783–792
Klintman M, Bendahl PO, Grabau D, Lövgren K, Malmström P, Fernö M, South Sweden Breast Cancer Group (2010) The prognostic value of Ki67 is dependent on estrogen receptor status and histological grade in premenopausal patients with node-negative breast cancer. Mod Pathol 23(2):251–259
Wang Y, Klijn JG, Zhang Y, Sieuwerts AM, Look MP, Yang F, Talantov D, Timmermans M, Meijer-van Gelder ME, Yu J, Jatkoe T, Berns EM, Atkins D, Foekens JA (2005) Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer. Lancet 365(9460):671–679
Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ, Panel members (2013) Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 24(9):2206–2223
Mauriac L, Keshaviah A, Debled M, Mouridsen H, Forbes JF, Thürlimann B, Paridaens R, Monnier A, Láng I, Wardley A, Nogaret JM, Gelber RD, Castiglione-Gertsch M, Price KN, Coates AS, Smith I, Viale G, Rabaglio M, Zabaznyi N, Goldhirsch A, BIG 1–98 Collaborative Group, International Breast Cancer Study Group (2007) Predictors of early relapse in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer in the BIG 1-98 trial. Ann Oncol 18(5):859–867
Goss PE, Ingle JN, Pritchard KI, Robert NJ, Muss H1, Gralow J, Gelmon K, Whelan T, Strasser-Weippl K, Rubin S, Sturtz K, Wolff AC, Winer E, Hudis C, Stopeck A, Beck JT, Kaur JS, Whelan K, Tu D, Parulekar WR (2016) Extending aromatase-inhibitor adjuvant therapy to 10 years. N Engl J Med 20;375(16):1590–1591
Grimm LJ (2016) Breast MRI radiogenomics: current status and research implications. J Magn Reson Imaging 43(6):1269–1278
Li SP, Makris A, Beresford MJ, Taylor NJ, Ah-See ML, Stirling JJ, d’Arcy JA, Collins DJ, Kozarski R, Padhani AR (2011) Use of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging to predict survival in patients with primary breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiology 260(1):68–78
Schmitz AM, Loo CE, Wesseling J, Pijnappel RM, Gilhuijs KG (2014) Association between rim enhancement of breast cancer on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and patient outcome: impact of subtype. Breast Cancer Res Treat 148(3):541–551
Uematsu T, Kasami M, Watanabe J (2014) Is evaluation of the presence of prepectoral edema on T2-weighted with fat-suppression 3 T breast MRI a simple and readily available noninvasive technique for estimation of prognosis in patients with breast cancer? Breast Cancer 21(6):684–692
Kim WH, Han W, Chang JM, Cho N, Park IA, Moon WK (2015) Location of triple-negative breast cancers: comparison with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers on MR imaging. PLoS ONE 10(1):e0116344. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116344.eCollection
Choi JS, Ko ES, Ko EY, Han BK, Nam SJ (2016) Background parenchymal enhancement on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging: association with recurrence-free survival in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Medicine (Baltimore) 95(9):e3000. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003000
van der Velden BH, Dmitriev I, Loo CE, Pijnappel RM, Gilhuijs KG (2015) Association between parenchymal enhancement of the contralateral breast in dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and outcome of patients with unilateral invasive breast cancer. Radiology 276(3):675–685
Yi A, Cho N, Yang KS, Han W, Noh DY, Moon WK (2015) Breast cancer recurrence in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer without and with preoperative MR imaging: a matched cohort study. Radiology 276(3):695–705
Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH et al (2013) ACR BI-RADS Magnetic resonance imaging. In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas (ed) Breast imaging reporting and data system. American College of Radiology, Reston
Baltzer PA, Yang F, Dietzel M, Herzog A, Simon A, Vag T, Gajda M, Camara O, Kaiser WA (2010) Sensitivity and specificity of unilateral edema on T2w-TSE sequences in MR-mammography considering 974 histologically verified lesions. Breast J 16(3):233–239
Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174
Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen WM, Tot T, Bone B (2003) Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 13(11):2425–2435
Lee SH, Cho N, Kim SJ, Cha JH, Cho KS, Ko ES, Moon WK (2008) Correlation between high resolution dynamic MR features and prognostic factors in breast cancer. Korean J Radiol 9(1):10–18
Matsubayashi R, Matsuo Y, Edakuni G, Satoh T, Tokunaga O, Kudo S (2000) Breast masses with peripheral rim enhancement on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: correlation of MR findings with histologic features and expression of growth factors. Radiology 217(3):841–848
Uematsu T (2015) Focal breast edema associated with malignancy on T2-weighted images of breast MRI: peritumoral edema, prepectoral edema, and subcutaneous edema. Breast Cancer 22(1):66–70
Yamamoto S, Han W, Kim Y, Du L, Jamshidi N, Huang D, Kim JH, Kuo MD (2015) Breast cancer: radiogenomic biomarker reveals associations among dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging, long noncoding RNA, and metastasis. Radiology 275(2):384–392
Bae MS, Shin SU, Ryu HS, Han W, Im SA, Park IA, Noh DY, Moon WK (2016) Pretreatment MR imaging features of triple-negative breast cancer: association with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence-free survival. Radiology 281(2):392–400
Rao A, Net J, Brandt K, Huang E, Freymann J, Burnside E, Kirby J, Morris E, Bonaccio E, Giger M, Jaffe C, Ganott M, Sutton E, Le-Petross H, Zuley M, Dogan B, Whitman G (2015) TU-CD-BRB-07: identification of associations between radiologist-annotated imaging features and genomic alterations in breast invasive carcinoma, a TCGA phenotype research group study. Med Phys 42:3603–3604. doi:10.1118/1.4925592
Zhu Y, Li H, Guo W, Drukker K, Lan L, Giger ML, Ji Y (2015) Deciphering genomic underpinnings of quantitative MRI-based radiomic phenotypes of invasive breast carcinoma. Sci Rep 5:17787
Cancer Genome Atlas Network (2012) Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 490(7418):61–70
Schrading S, Kuhl CK (2008) Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology 246(1):58–70
Tanis PJ, van Rijk MC, Nieweg OE (2005) The posterior lymphatic network of the breast rediscovered. J Surg Oncol 91(3):195–198
Lehmann BD, Bauer JA, Chen X, Sanders ME, Chakravarthy AB, Shyr Y, Pietenpol JA (2011) Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest 121(7):2750–2767
Bae MS, Park SY, Song SE, Kim WH, Lee SH, Han W, Park IA, Noh DY, Moon WK (2015) Heterogeneity of triple-negative breast cancer: mammographic, US, and MR imaging features according to androgen receptor expression. Eur Radiol 25(2):419–427