4.5 Article

DCE-MRI Analysis Methods for Predicting the Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Pilot Study Findings

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
卷 71, 期 4, 页码 1592-1602

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.24782

关键词

DCE-MRI; breast cancer; neoadjuvant therapy; treatment response

资金

  1. Vanderbilt CTSA [NCI 1R01CA129961, NCI 1U01CA142565, NCI 1P50 098131, NCI P30 CA068485, NCRR/NIH UL1 RR024975-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeThe purpose of this pilot study is to determine (1) if early changes in both semiquantitative and quantitative DCE-MRI parameters, observed after the first cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients, show significant difference between responders and nonresponders and (2) if these parameters can be used as a prognostic indicator of the eventual response. MethodsTwenty-eight patients were examined using DCE-MRI pre-, post-one cycle, and just prior to surgery. The semiquantitative parameters included longest dimension, tumor volume, initial area under the curve, and signal enhancement ratio related parameters, while quantitative parameters included K-trans, v(e), k(ep), v(p), and (i) estimated using the standard Tofts-Kety, extended Tofts-Kety, and fast exchange regime models. ResultsOur preliminary results indicated that the signal enhancement ratio washout volume and k(ep) were significantly different between pathologic complete responders from nonresponders (P<0.05) after a single cycle of chemotherapy. Receiver operator characteristic analysis showed that the AUC of the signal enhancement ratio washout volume was 0.75, and the AUCs of k(ep) estimated by three models were 0.78, 0.76, and 0.73, respectively. ConclusionIn summary, the signal enhancement ratio washout volume and k(ep) appear to predict breast cancer response after one cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This observation should be confirmed with additional prospective studies. Magn Reson Med 71:1592-1602, 2014. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据