Characteristics of quantitative perfusion parameters on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in mammographically occult breast cancer.
The purpose of this study was to compare the characteristics of quantitative per-fusion parameters obtained from dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with mammographically occult (MO) breast cancers and those with mammographically visible (MV) breast cancers. Quantitative parameters (AUC, Ktrans, kep, ve, vp, and wi) from 13 MO breast cancers and 16 MV breast cancers were mapped after the DCE-MRI data were acquired. Various prog-nostic factors, including axillary nodal status, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), Ki-67, p53, E-cadherin, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) were obtained in each group. Fisher's exact test was used to compare any differences of the various prognostic factors between the two groups. The Mann- Whitney U test was applied to compare the quantitative parameters between these two groups. Finally, Spearman's correlation was used to investigate the relation-ships between perfusion indices and four factors - age, tumor size, Ki-67, and p53 - for each group. Although age, tumor size, and the prognostic factors were not statistically different between the two groups, the mean values of the quantitative parameters, except wi in the MV group, were higher than those in the MO group without statistical significance (p = 0.219). The kep value was significantly differ-ent between the two groups (p = 0.048), but the other parameters were not. In the MO group, vp with size, ve with p53, and Ktrans and vp with Ki-67 had significant correlations (p < 0.05). However, in the MV group, only kep showed significant correlation with age. The kep value was only the perfusion parameter of statistical significance between MO and MV breast cancers.
Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gandong, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University. oddie2@naver.com.
Jung Kyu
JK
Ryu
Sun Jung
SJ
Rhee
Jeong Yoon
JY
Song
Soo Hyun
SH
Cho
Geon-Ho
GH
Jahng
D000328:Adult; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D018270:Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D018275:Carcinoma, Lobular / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D003287:Contrast Media; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007089:Image Enhancement / Q000379:methods*; D007091:Image Processing, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D008327:Mammography / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D010477:Perfusion; D012189:Retrospective Studies
D003287:Contrast Media
Magn Reson Med. 2004 Apr;51(4):858-62
15065262
Acta Radiol. 2010 Nov;51(9):969-76
20942730
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002 Oct;16(4):407-22
12353256
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Dec;197(6):1498-505
22109308
Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Jan;33(1):72-80
25179138
Acad Radiol. 2003 Sep;10(9):963-8
13678084
Med Phys. 2014 Dec;41(12):124301
25471985
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002 Jul;179(1):171-8
12076929
Br J Cancer. 2007 May 21;96(10):1504-13
17453008
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003 May;17(5):509-20
12720260
Magn Reson Med. 2014 Apr;71(4):1592-602
23661583
Cancer Sci. 2011 Oct;102(10 ):1862-7
21752153
Eur Radiol. 2014 May;24(5):1089-96
24553785
Am J Pathol. 1995 May;146(5):1029-39
7538264
Korean J Radiol. 2014 Sep-Oct;15(5):554-77
25246817
Korean J Radiol. 2013 Jul-Aug;14 (4):589-96
23901316
Radiology. 1996 Mar;198(3):813-8
8628876
Curr Med Imaging Rev. 2009 May 1;3(2):91-107
19829742
Magn Reson Imaging. 1995;13(5):693-700
8569443
J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Jul;8(7):FC04-8
25177567
Radiology. 2004 Aug;232(2):585-91
15205478
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Feb;126(1):185-92
20711652
J Am Coll Radiol. 2010 Jan;7(1):18-27
20129267
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004 Nov;20(5):748-57
15503330
Phys Med. 2014 Sep;30(6):635-43
24793824
Magn Reson Med. 2012 Jul;68(1):261-71
22127821
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012 Jul;36(1):145-51
22392859
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006 Jan;23(1):87-91
16315211