Journals / İstanbul Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Tıp Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1

Evaluation of the Relationship Between 3.0 Tesla Diffusion Tensor MR Imaging Parameters and Breast Cancer Subtypes

3.0 Tesla Difüzyon Tensor MR Görüntüleme Parametreleri ile Meme Kanseri Subtipleri Arasındaki İlişkinin Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
37–42
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the binary comparisons to find the group that makes the difference; MD measurements in Luminal A and HER2 enriched subtypes were significantly different (p=0,038; p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: To investigate relationship of breast cancer subtypes and the mean diffusivity (MD) and fractional anisotropy (FA) measured by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: This retrospective study included 102 patients (age 51.37±11.47 years) who underwent pre-operative contrast-enhanced 3.0 Tesla breast MR and DTI, from September 2015 to February 2018.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the binary comparisons to find the group that makes the difference; MD measurements in Luminal A and HER2 enriched subtypes were significantly different (p=0,038; p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Introduction: To investigate relationship of breast cancer subtypes and the mean diffusivity (MD) and fractional anisotropy (FA) measured by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). Method: This retrospective study included 102 patients (age 51.37±11.47 years) who underwent pre-operative contrast-enhanced 3.0 Tesla breast MR and DTI, from September 2015 to February 2018. Patients were histopathologically confirmed invasive breast cancer. Histologic analysis parameters included tumor size, expression of estrogen receptor (ER), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Breast cancer is divided into the following molecular subtype: estrogen receptor positive and HER2 negative (luminal A, n=46); estrogen receptor positive and HER2 positive (luminal B, n=24); estrogen receptor negative and HER2 positive (HER2 enriched, n=13); estrogen receptor negative and HER2 negative (triple negative, n=18). Comparisons were made using Kolmogorov Smirnov, Kruskal Wallis H tests and Benforroni corrected Dunn multiple com-parisons test. Results: There was no statistically significant relationship between breast cancer subtypes and FA measurements (p>0.05). A statistically significant difference was found between MD values of four subtypes of breast cancer. According to the binary comparisons to find the group that makes the difference; MD measurements in Luminal A and HER2 enriched subtypes were significantly different (p=0,038; p

Özet

Amaç: Çalışmamızda meme kanseri subtipleri ile meme manyetik rezonans (MR) görüntülemede alınan diffüzyon tensor görüntüleme (DTG) parametrelerinden ortalama difüzyon (MD) ve fraksi-yonel anisotropi (FA) değeri arasındaki ilişkinin araştırılmasını amaçladık.Yöntem: Çalışmamızda Eylül 2015 ve Şubat 2018 tarihleri arasında pre-operatif 3.0 Tesla kont-rastlı meme MR ve DTG yapılan 101 meme kanseri olgusu (51.37±11.47 yaş aralığında) geriye dönük olarak tarandı. Bu hastalar histopatolojik olarak tanı almış invaziv meme kanseri olgularıy-dı. Histopatolojik olarak östrojen reseptörü (ER), HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor2)overekspresyonu ve tümör boyutu bakıldı. Meme kanseri şu moleküler alt tiplere ayrıldı: Östrojen reseptör pozitif ve HER2 negatif grup (Luminal A, n=46), Östrojen reseptör pozitif ve HER2 pozitif grup (Luminal B, n=24), östrojen reseptör negatif ve HER2 pozitif grup (HER2 pozitif, n=13), östrojen reseptör negatif ve HER2 negatif grup (Triple negatif, n=18). Kolmogorov Smirnov, Kruskal Wallis H testleri ve Benforroni Düzeltmeli Dunn çoklu karşılaştırmalar testi ile istatistiksel analizler yapıldı.Bulgular: Luminal A, Luminal B, HER2 (+) ve triple negatif gruplarına göre yaş (p=0.959), kitle boyutu (p=0.162) ve FA (p=0.674) değerleri arasında anlamlı farklılık saptanmamıştır (p>0.05). Ancak luminal A, Luminal B, HER2 (+) ve Triple negatif grupları ile MD medyan değerleri arasında anlamlı farklılık olduğu saptandı. Saptanan bu anlamlı farklılığın kaynağını tespit edebilmek ama-cıyla Benforroni düzeltmeli Dunn Çoklu karşılaştırma testi yapılmıştır. Yapılan çoklu karşılaştırma-lar sonucunda, Luminal A ve HER2(+) alt grup arasında MD değerleri anlamlı düzeyde farklı olduğu görüldü (p=0.038).Sonuç: Bu bulgular meme invaziv tümörlerinde ölçülen difüzyon tensor değerlerinin meme kanse-ri moleküler alt tiplerini öngörmek açısından anlamlı olabileceğini düşündürmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

İNCİ, E., KARABULUT, S., ÖZAL, S. T., GEMİCİ, A. A. (2022). Evaluation of the Relationship Between 3.0 Tesla Diffusion Tensor MR Imaging Parameters and Breast Cancer Subtypes. İstanbul Kanuni Sultan Süleyman Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1, 37–42. https://ajindex.com/articles/551024

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Effi AB, Aman NA, Koui BS, Koffi KD, Traore ZC, Kouyate M: Immunohistochemical determination of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer: relati-onship with clinicopathologic factors in 302 patients in Ivory Coast. BMC Cancer 2017;17:115.
  2. Harbeck N, Gnant M. Breast cancer. Lancet 2017;389:1134-50.
  3. Lam SW, Jimenez CR, Boven E. Breast cancer classifica-tion by proteomic technologies: current state of know-ledge. Cancer Treat Rev. 2014;40:129-38.
  4. Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, et al. 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. 24:2206-23
  5. Yuan ZY, Wang SS, Zhu MQ, Zheng L, Luo WB, et al. Clinical characteristics and prognosis of different subt-ypes of breast cancer. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 2008;30:456-61
  6. Huang Z, Wen W, Zheng Y, Gao YT, Wu C, et al. Breast cancer incidence and mortality: Trends over 40 years among women in Shanghai, china. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1129-34.
  7. Woodhams R, Ramadan S, Stanwell P, Sakamoto S, Hata H, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the breast: principles and clinical applications. Radiographics 2011;31:1059-84.
  8. Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 2001;220:13-30.
  9. Yamaguchi K, Schacht D, Sennett CA, Newstead GM, Imaizumi T, et al. Decision making for breast lesions initially detected at contrast-enhanced breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 201:1376-85.
  10. Pinker K, Bogner W, Baltzer P, Gruber S, Bickel H, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the breast using dyna-mic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion-weighted imag¬ing, and 3-dimensional pro-ton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. Invest Radiol. 2014;49(6):421-30.
  11. Yoshikawa MI, Ohsumi S, Sugata S, Kataoka M, Takashima S, et al. Relation between cancer cellularity and apparent diffusion coefficient values using diffusi-on weighted magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer. Radiat Med. 2008;26:222-6. https://d