4.6 Article

Early Assessment of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response Using Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Luminal B-like Subtype of Breast Cancer Patients: A Single-Center Prospective Study

Journal

DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13040694

Keywords

breast cancer; neoadjuvant therapy; multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to evaluate the performance of multiparametric breast magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with luminal B subtype breast cancer. The study showed that breast mpMRI evaluation before and after two cycles of NAC can effectively predict treatment response.
This study aimed to evaluate the performance of multiparametric breast magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with luminal B subtype breast cancer. The prospective study included thirty-five patients treated with NAC for both early and locally advanced breast cancer of the luminal B subtype at the University Hospital Centre Zagreb between January 2015 and December 2018. All patients underwent breast mpMRI before and after two cycles of NAC. Evaluation of mpMRI examinations included analysis of both morphological (shape, margins, and pattern of enhancement) and kinetic characteristics (initial signal increase and post-initial behavior of the time-signal intensity curve), which were additionally interpreted with a Gottingen score (GS). Histopathological analysis of surgical specimens included grading the tumor response based on the residual cancer burden (RCB) grading system and revealed 29 NAC responders (RCB-0 (pCR), I, II) and 6 NAC non-responders (RCB-III). Changes in GS were compared with RCB classes. A lack of GS decrease after the second cycle of NAC is associated with RCB class and non-responders to NAC.

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