The goals of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) are to reduce tumor volume and to offer a prognostic indicator in assessing treatment response. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) is an established method for evaluating response to NAC in patients with breast cancer.
Purpose
To validate the role of unenhanced MRI (ue-MRI) compared to CE-MRI for assessing response to NAC in women with breast cancer.
Material and Methods
Seventy-one patients with ongoing NAC for breast cancer underwent MRI before, during, and at the end of NAC. Ue-MRI was performed with T2-weighted sequences with iterative decomposition of water and fat and diffusion-weighted sequences. CE-MRI was performed using three-dimensional T1-weighted sequences before and after administration of gadobenate dimeglumine. Two blinded observers rated ue-MRI and CE-MRI for the evaluation of tumor response. Statistical analysis was performed to compare lesion size and ADC values changes during therapy, as well as inter-observer agreement.
Results
There were no statistically significant differences between ue-MRI and CE-MRI sequences for evaluation of lesion size at baseline and after every cycle of treatment (P > 0.05). The mean tumor ADC values at baseline and across the cycles of NAC were significantly different for the responder group.
Conclusion
Ue-MRI can achieve similar results to CE-MRI for the assessment of tumor response to NAC. ADC values can differentiate responders from non-responders.
FangbergetANilsenLBHoleKHet al.Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer-response evaluation and prediction of response to treatment using dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Eur Radiol2011; 21: 1188–1199.
2.
WoodhamsRKakitaSHataHet al.Identification of residual breast carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: diffusion -weighted imaging - comparison with contrast-enhanced MR imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology2010; 254: 357–366.
3.
SharmaUDanishadKKSeenuVet al.Longitudinal study of the assessment by MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging of tumor response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. NMR Biomed2009; 22: 104–113.
4.
NilsenLFangbergetAGeierOet al.Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for pretreatment prediction and monitoring of treatment response of patients with locally advanced breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Acta Oncol2010; 49: 354–360.
5.
FisherBBrownAMamounasEet al.Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol1997; 15: 2483–2493.
DenisFDesbiez-BourcierAVChapironCet al.Contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging underestimates residual disease following neoadjuvant docetaxel based chemotherapy for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol2004; 30: 1069–1076.
8.
LiuYHYeJMXuL. Effectiveness of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in evaluating clinical responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Chin Med J (Engl)2011; 124: 194–198.
9.
RosenELBlackwellKLBakerJAet al.Accuracy of MRI in the detection of residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Am J Roentgenol2003; 181: 1275–1282.
10.
MannRMKuhlCKKinkelKet al.Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol2008; 18: 1307–1318.
11.
TudoricaAOhKYChuiSYet al.Early prediction and evaluation of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using quantitative DCE-MRI. Transl Oncol2016; 9: 8–17.
12.
YabuuchiHMatsuoYSunamiSet al.Detection of non-palpable breast cancer in asymptomatic women by using unenhanced diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted MR imaging: comparison with mammography and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR. imaging. Eur Radiol2011; 21: 11–17.
13.
BaltzerPABenndorfMDietzelMet al.Sensitivity and specificity of unenhanced MR mammography (DWI combined with T2-weighted TSE imaging, ueMRM) for the differentiation of mass lesions. Eur Radiol2010; 20: 1101–1110.
14.
TagliaficoABignottiBTagliaficoGet al.Breast density assessment using a 3T MRI system: comparison among different sequences. PLoS One2014; 9: e99027.
15.
D'OrsiCSicklesEAMendelsonEBet al.Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS Breast Imaging Atlas, 5th ed. Reston, VA: ACR, 2013.
16.
LiXHuangWRooneyWD. Signal-to-noise ratio, contrast-to-noise ratio and pharmacokinetic modeling considerations in dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging2012; 30: 1313–1322.
17.
KuhlC. The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology2007; 244: 356–378.
18.
KuhlCK. Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. Radiology2007; 244: 672–691.
19.
SardanelliFPodoFD'AgnoloGet al.Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology2007; 242: 698–715.
20.
MarinovichMLHoussamiNMacaskillPet al.Meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst2013; 105: 321–333.
21.
ChenJHSuMY. Clinical application of magnetic resonance imaging in management of breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Biomed Res Int2013; 2013: 348167.
22.
PratiRMinamiCAGornbeinJAet al.Accuracy of clinical evaluation of locally advanced breast cancer in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer2009; 115: 1194–1202.
StojanovDAracki-TrenkicABenedeto-StojanovD. Gadolinium deposition within the dentate nucleus and globus pallidus after repeated administrations of gadolinium-based contrast agents-current status. Neuroradiology2016; 58: 433–441.
25.
RamalhoJSemelkaRCRamalhoMet al.Gadolinium-based contrast agent accumulation and toxicity: an update. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2016; 37: 1192–1198.
26.
RahbarHPartridgeSCEbyPRet al.Characterization of ductal carcinoma in situ on diffusion weighted breast MRI. Eur Radiol2011; 21: 2011–2019.
27.
IacconiCGiannelliMMariniCet al.The role of mean diffusivity (MD) as a predictive index of the response to chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: a preliminary study. Eur Radiol2010; 20: 303–308.
28.
WoodhamsRMatsunagaKKanSet al.ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors. Magn Reson Med Sci2005; 4: 35–42.
29.
HatakenakaMSoedaHYabuuchiHet al.Apparent diffusion coefficients of breast tumors: clinical application. Magn Reson Med Sci2008; 7: 23–29.
30.
ClauserPMarconMMaieronMet al.Is there a systematic bias of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements of the breast if measured on different workstations? An inter- and intra-reader agreement study. Eur Radiol2016; 26: 2291–2296.
31.
ImamuraTIsomotoISueyoshiEet al.Diagnostic performance of ADC for Non-mass-like breast lesions on MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci2010; 9: 217–225.
