4.6 Article

Correlation between apparent diffusion coefficient of magnetic resonance imaging and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer

Journal

RADIOLOGIA MEDICA
Volume 124, Issue 7, Pages 581-587

Publisher

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s11547-019-01008-w

Keywords

Breast cancer; MRI; ADC; TIL

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PurposeTo evaluate a possible correlation between apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) level in breast cancer (BC). A second objective was to assess whether there were other histopathologic features that could affect mean ADC value.MethodsIn this 4-year retrospective study were included 125 patients who underwent radical or modified mastectomy for monofocal BC. All subjects had performed preoperative MRI with the same 1.5-T machine and protocol, which consisted of STIR, DWI and DCE sequences. Based on TIL score, BCs were stratified into two groups: absent-low TIL (<= 10%) and medium-high TIL (>10%). The t test was used to correlate mean ADC value with TIL groups. Receiver operating characteristic curve and Youden index were used in order to identify ADC value threshold to distinguish the two TIL groups.ResultsBC patients with absent-low TIL level and medium-high TIL one were, respectively, 66 (52.8%) and 59 (47.2%). Mean ADC value was 1.050.19*10(-3)mm(2)s(-1). Absent-low TIL group showed a lower mean ADC value than medium-high TIL one (0.96 +/- 0.18*10(-3)mm(2)s(-1) vs 1.14 +/- 0.16*10(-3)mm(2)s(-1); p<0.0001). ADC value threshold in order to distinguish the two TIL groups with maximum sensitivity (67.8%) and specificity (80.3%) was 1.03*10(-3) mm(2)s(-1). ADC value was shown to be significantly related to TILs level (p<0.0001) and cancer histotype (p=0.0006), with a lower mean ADC value correlated to absent-low TIL level and ductal histotype.Conclusion BCs with absent-low TIL showed a statistically significant lower mean ADC value than those with medium-high TIL. ADC value threshold in order to distinguish these two groups was 1.03*10(-3)mm(2)s(-1).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available