The Relationship Between MRI Findings and Molecular Subtypes in Women With Breast Cancer

Öztürk, Veli Süha; Polat, Yasemin; Soyder, Aykut; Tanyeri, Ahmet; Karaman, Can Zafer; Taşkın, Füsun

doi:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2019.07.003

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among MRI features on T2-weighted images, intralesional necrosis and peritumoural oedema have proved to be positive predictor of the triple-negative status. These results are in accordance with previous literature [ 7 , 8 , 10 , 45 , 50 , 53 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…4 ). These data confirm existing evidence in literature [ 7 , 9 , 10 , 45 , 50 – 54 ]. The typical regular shape can be explained by the frequent occurrence of “pushing”, non-infiltrative growth pattern of triple negatives compared to other subtypes of BC, while the presence of rim enhancement on contrast-enhanced sequences has been associated with increased angiogenesis and vascular endothelial growth factor expression and with the lack of oestrogen and progesterone receptors [ 55 , 56 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Radiologic-pathologic correlation in breast cancer: do MRI biomarkers correlate with pathologic features and molecular subtypes?

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Breast cancer (BC) includes different pathological and molecular subtypes. This study aimed to investigate whether multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) could reliably predict the molecular status of BC, comparing mpMRI features with pathological and immunohistochemical results. Methods This retrospective study included 156 patients with an ultrasound-guided biopsy-proven BC, who underwent breast mpMRI (including diffusion-weighted imaging) on a 3-T scanner from 2017 to 2020. Histopathological analyses were performed on the surgical specimens. Kolmogorov–Smirnov Z, χ2, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results Fifteen patients were affected with ductal carcinoma in situ, 122 by invasive carcinoma of no special type, and 19 with invasive lobular carcinoma. Out of a total of 141 invasive cancers, 45 were luminal A-like, 54 luminal B-like, 5 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive, and 37 triple negative. The regression analyses showed that size < 2 cm predicted luminal A-like status (p = 0.025), while rim enhancement (p < 0.001), intralesional necrosis (p = 0.001), peritumoural oedema (p < 0.001), and axillary adenopathies (p = 0.012) were negative predictors. Oppositely, round shape (p = 0.001), rim enhancement (p < 0.001), intralesional necrosis (p < 0.001), and peritumoural oedema (p < 0.001) predicted triple-negative status. Conclusions mpMRI has been confirmed to be a valid noninvasive predictor of BC subtypes, especially luminal A and triple negative. Considering the central role of pathology in BC diagnosis and immunohistochemical profiling in the current precision medicine era, a detailed radiologic-pathologic correlation seems vital to properly evaluate BC.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Radiologic-pathologic correlation in breast cancer: do MRI biomarkers correlate with pathologic features and molecular subtypes?

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another instance is the increased diagnostic accuracy of MP-MRI in breast cancer molecular subtype prediction on the basis of the underlying tumor biology. For example, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is characterized by well-known imaging biomarkers, such as solitary mass lesion, with smooth margin, large tumor size and rim enhancement at CE-MRI [104][105][106], while intralesional necrosis and peritumoral edema are positive predictor of the triple-negative status among T2 MRI features [105,107] (Figs. 4 and 5).…”

Section: Biomarkersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast imaging: Beyond the detection

Galati

Moffa

Pediconi

2022

European Journal of Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Radiation exposure, early menarche, late menopause, obesity, postmenopausal hormone therapy, alcohol use, and never getting pregnant or becoming pregnant at an older age are also risk factors. Histological parameters used in the management and treatment of breast cancer, tumor size, axillary lymph node metastasis, histological grade, lymphovascular invasion, hormone receptors such as estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status are the most important prognostic factors (8)(9)(10). Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, and five different molecular subtypes have been defined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of the differences of breast cancer molecular subtypes in radiological and histopathological parameters and their effects on lymphovascular invasion

Yazıcıoğlu

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Breast cancer has heterogeneous tumor biology. Therefore, breast cancer is divided into molecular subtypes. However, molecular subtypes also show heterogeneity within themselves. In our study, we compared whether there were radiological and pathological differences between breast cancer molecular subtypes.Methods: The data of 569 patients operated on for breast cancer in our General Surgery clinic during an 8-year period were analyzed retrospectively. After dividing the patients into groups consisting of molecular subtypes, their radiological and pathological findings were compared.Results: According to the molecular classification of breast cancer, 47.6% of the patients were in the luminal A group, 23.9% in luminal B, 7.7% in HER2-enriched, and 12% in TN, and 8.8% in normal-like groups. DCIS and LCIS were significantly less common in the TN group than in the others (p=0.015). Tumor diameter and grade were considerably higher in the normal-like, HER2-enriched, and TN groups than in the other groups (p<0.001, p<0.001). LVI was significantly lower in luminal A and significantly higher in luminal B (p<0.001). Mortality was significantly higher in the luminal B and TN groups than in the other groups (p = 0.029). Conclusion:The addition of the basal-like group when classifying breast cancer into molecular subtypes showed histopathological differences. More studies are needed to investigate its effects on treatment and prognosis.

show abstract

The Relationship Between MRI Findings and Molecular Subtypes in Women With Breast Cancer

Cited by 24 publications

References 26 publications

Radiologic-pathologic correlation in breast cancer: do MRI biomarkers correlate with pathologic features and molecular subtypes?

Radiologic-pathologic correlation in breast cancer: do MRI biomarkers correlate with pathologic features and molecular subtypes?

Breast imaging: Beyond the detection

Investigation of the differences of breast cancer molecular subtypes in radiological and histopathological parameters and their effects on lymphovascular invasion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About