4.3 Article

Diagnostic accuracy of MRI to evaluate tumour response and residual tumour size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients

期刊

RADIOLOGY AND ONCOLOGY
卷 50, 期 1, 页码 73-79

出版社

ASSOC RADIOLOGY & ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1515/raon-2016-0007

关键词

breast cancer; MRI; residual tumour; neoadjuvant chemotherapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. The aim, of the study was to estimate the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in assessing residual disease in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and to identify the clinicopathological factors that affect the diagnostic accuracy of breast MRI to determine residual tumour size following NAC. Patients and methods. 91 breast cancer patients undergoing NAC (92 breast lesions) were included in the study. Breast MRI was performed at baseline and after completion of NAC. Treatment response was evaluated by MRI and histopathological examination to investigate the ability of MRI to predict tumour response. Residual tumour size was measured on post-treatment MRI and compared with pathology in 89 lesions. Clinicopathological factors were analyzed to compare MRI-pathologic size differences. Results. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy for diagnosing invasive residual disease by using MRI were 75.00%, 78.57%, 88.89%, 57.89%, and 76.09% respectively. The Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) between tumour sizes determined by MRI and pathology was r = 0.648 (p < 0.001). The size discrepancy was significantly lower in cancers with initial MRI size = 5 cm (p = 0.050), in cancers with high tumour grade (p < 0.001), and in patients with hormonal receptor-negative cancer (p = 0.033). Conclusions. MRI is an accurate tool for evaluating tumour response after NAC. The accuracy of MRI in estimating residual tumour size varies with the baseline MRI tumour size, the tumour grade and the hormonal receptor status.

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

4.3
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