Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors

  • Breast
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this exploratory study was to correlate kinetic and morphologic MR features with histologic prognostic factors in invasive breast cancer. Sixty-one women with invasive breast cancer underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T, using T1-weighted 3D fast low-angle shot technique. The MR characteristics were correlated with classical pathologic prognostic factors (tumor size, histologic type, grade and lymph node status) and immunohistochemically detected biomarkers [c-erbB-2, p53, Ki-67, and estrogen receptor (ER)]. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed. Presence of rim enhancement pattern, early maximal enhancement and washout phenomenon were independently associated with established predictors of poor prognosis (higher histologic grade, positive Ki-67, and negative ER status). Our results suggest that these MR signs are not only important in differentiating benign from malignant lesions, but may also be useful to noninvasively identify highly aggressive breast carcinomas.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Orel SG, Schnall MD (2001) MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology 220:13–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hrung JM, Sonnad SS, Schwartz JS, Langlotz CP (1999) Accuracy of MR imaging in the work-up of suspicious breast lesions: a diagnostic meta-analysis. Acad Radiol 6:387–397

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD et al. (1994) MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced TurboFLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 193:777–781

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, Troupin RH (1994) Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic–pathologic correlation. Radiology 190:485–493

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S et al. (1999) Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 211:101–110

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Abraham DC, Jones RC, Jones SE et al. (1996) Evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic response of locally advanced breast cancer by magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 78:91–100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Boné B, Aspelin P, Bronge L, Veress B (1998) Contrast-enhanced MR imaging as a prognostic indicator of breast cancer. Acta Radiol 39:279–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Horsman A (1997) Dynamic MR imaging of invasive breast cancer: correlation with tumour grade and other histological factors. Br J Radiol 70:446–451

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL et al. (1995) Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 197:387–395

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fischer U, Kopka L, Brinck U, Korabiowska M, Schauer A, Grabbe E (1997) Prognostic value of contrast-enhanced MR mammography in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 7:1002–1005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Elston CW, Ellis IO, Pinder SE (1999) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 31:209–223

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Yaghan R, Stanton PD, Robertson KW, Going JJ, Murray GD, McArdle CS (1998) Oestrogen receptor status predicts local recurrence following breast conservation surgery for early breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 24:424–426

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lovekin C, Ellis IO, Locker A et al. (1991) c-erbB-2 oncoprotein expression in primary and advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 63:439–443

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bergh J (1999) Clinical studies of p53 in treatment and benefit of breast cancer patients. Endocr Relat Cancer 6:51–59

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Scholzen T, Gerdes J (2000) The Ki-67 protein: from the known and the unknown. J Cell Physiol 182:311–322

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Fox SB (1997) Tumour angiogenesis and prognosis. Histopathology 30:294–301

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Weidner N, Semple JP, Welch WR, Folkman J (1991) Tumor angiogenesis and metastasis: correlation in invasive breast carcinoma. N Engl J Med 324:1–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Gasparini G, Harris AL (1995) Clinical importance of determination of tumor angiogenesis in breast carcinoma: much more than a new prognostic tool. J Clin Oncol 13:765–782

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Heimann R, Ferguson D, Powers C, Recant WM, Weichselbaum RR, Hellman S (1996) Angiogenesis as a predictor of long-term survival for patients with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:1764–1769

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Axelsson K, Ljung BM, Moore DH II et al. (1995) Tumor angiogenesis as a prognostic assay for invasive ductal breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:997–1008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Goulding H, Abdul-Rashid NF, Robertson JF et al. (1995) Assessment of angiogenesis in breast carcinoma: an important factor in prognosis? Hum Pathol 26:1196–1200

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Frouge C, Guinebretiere JM, Contesso G, Paola R di, Blery M (1994) Correlation between contrast-enhancement in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast and tumor angiogenesis. Invest Radiol 29:1043–1049

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S et al. (1996) Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 200:639–649

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Buckley DL, Drew PJ, Mussurakis S, Monson JR, Horsman A (1997) Microvessel density of invasive breast cancer assessed by dynamic Gd-DTPA enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 7:461–464

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG et al. (1997) Breast MR imaging: interpretation model. Radiology 202:833–841

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Schnall MD, Rosten S, Englander S, Orel SG, Nunes LW (2001) A combined architectural and kinetic interpretation model for breast MR images. Acad Radiol 8:591–597

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Kaiser WA, Zeitler E (1989) MR imaging of the breast: fast imaging sequences with and without Gd-DTPA. Preliminary observations. Radiology 170:681–686

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Heywang SH, Wolf A, Pruss E, Hilbertz T, Eiermann W, Permanetter W (1989) MR imaging of the breast with Gd-DTPA: use and limitations. Radiology 171:95–103

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Stack JP, Redmond OM, Codd MB, Dervan PA, Ennis JT (1990) Breast disease: tissue characterization with Gd-DTPA enhancement profiles. Radiology 174:491–494

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Heywang-Köbrunner SH, Bick U, Bradley WG Jr et al. (2001) International investigation of breast MRI: results of a multicentre study (11 sites) concerning diagnostic parameters for contrast-enhanced MRI based on 519 histopathologically correlated lesions. Eur Radiol 11:531–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ikeda O, Yamashita Y, Morishita S et al. (1999) Characterization of breast masses by dynamic-enhanced MR imaging: a logistic regression analysis. Acta Radiol 40:585–592

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Elston CW (1987) Grading of invasive carcinoma of the breast. In: Page DL, Anderson TJ (eds) Diagnostic histopathology of the breast, 1st edn. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 300–311

  33. Jatoi I, Hilsenbeck SG, Clark GM, Osborne CK (1999) Significance of axillary lymph node metastasis in primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:2334–2340

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Mirza AN, Mirza NQ, Vlastos G, Singletary SE (2002) Prognostic factors in node-negative breast cancer: a review of studies with sample size more than 200 and follow-up more than 5 years. Ann Surg 235:10–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Weidner N (1995) Current pathologic methods for measuring intratumoral microvessel density within breast carcinoma and other solid tumors. Breast Cancer Res Treat 36:169–180

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Jong J, van Diest P, Baak JP (1995) Heterogeneity and reproducibility of microvessel counts in breast cancer. Lab Invest 73:922–926

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ahlgren J, Risberg B, Villman K, Bergh J (2002) Angiogenesis in invasive breast carcinoma: a prospective study of tumour heterogeneity. Eur J Cancer 38:64–69

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Gasparini G (2000) Prognostic value of vascular endothelial growth factor in breast cancer. Oncologist 5 (Suppl 1):37–44

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Hulka CA, Edmister WB, Smith BL et al. (1997) Dynamic echo-planar imaging of the breast: experience in diagnosing breast carcinoma and correlation with tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 205:837–842

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Helbich TH, Roberts TP, Gossmann A et al. (2000) Quantitative gadopentetate-enhanced MRI of breast tumors: testing of different analytic methods. Magn Reson Med 44:915–924

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Knopp MV, Weiss E, Sinn HP et al. (1999) Pathophysiologic basis of contrast enhancement in breast tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging 10:260–266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Wedegartner U, Bick U, Wortler K, Rummeny E, Bongartz G (2001) Differentiation between benign and malignant findings on MR mammography: usefulness of morphological criteria. Eur Radiol 11:1645–1650

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Mussurakis S, Buckley DL, Drew PJ et al. (1997) Dynamic MR imaging of the breast combined with analysis of contrast agent kinetics in the differentiation of primary breast tumours. Clin Radiol 52:516–526

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Schnall MD (2001) An overview of interpretation strategies for breast MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 9:289–294

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. 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 217:841–848

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Winston JS, Budnick RM, Stewart CC (1996) Invasive breast carcinoma: analysis of dynamic magnetic resonance imaging enhancement features and cell proliferative activity determined by DNA S-phase percentage. Cancer 77:1844–1849

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Sherif H, Mahfouz AE, Oellinger H et al. (1997) Peripheral washout sign on contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast. Radiology 205:209–213

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Linderholm B, Tavelin B, Grankvist K, Henriksson R (1998) Vascular endothelial growth factor is of high prognostic value in node-negative breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 16:3121–3128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Kumar R, Yarmand-Bagheri R (2001) The role of HER2 in angiogenesis. Semin Oncol 28(Suppl 16):27–32

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Izumi Y, Xu L, Tomaso E di, Fukumura D, Jain RK (2002) Tumour biology: herceptin acts as an anti-angiogenic cocktail. Nature 416:279–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Nakopoulou L, Stefanaki K, Panayotopoulou E et al. (2002) Expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2/Flk-1 in breast carcinomas: correlation with proliferation. Hum Pathol 33:863–870

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Bone B, Wiberg MK, Parrado C, Falkmer U, Aspelin P, Gad A (1998) Mechanism of contrast enhancement in breast lesions at MR imaging. Acta Radiol 39:494–500

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Diagnostic Radiology, Center for Surgical Sciences, Karolinska Institute, Huddinge University Hospital, 14186, Stockholm, Sweden

    Botond K. Szabó, Peter Aspelin, Maria Kristoffersen Wiberg & Beata Boné

  2. Department of Pathology, Falun Central Hospital, 79182, Falun, Sweden

    Tibor Tot

Authors
  1. Botond K. Szabó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Aspelin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria Kristoffersen Wiberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tibor Tot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Beata Boné
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Botond K. Szabó.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Szabó, B.K., Aspelin, P., Kristoffersen Wiberg, M. et al. Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 13, 2425–2435 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-2000-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-2000-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation