PURPOSE: To investigate the correlation between quantitative parameters on contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and pathological prognostic factors in patients with breast invasive ductal carcinomas (IDCs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 102 patients with pathologically proven IDCs were retrospectively enrolled and all were preoperatively evaluated by CEUS. Quantitative analysis was conducted using the SonoLiver® software. On the parametric imaging, the data of rise time (RT), time to peak (TTP), mean transit time (mTT) and maximum intensity (IMAX) were recorded. Pathological prognostic factors, including histological grade, tumor diameter, lymph node status, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), C-erb-B2 and Ki-67 expression were evaluated. Correlation of enhancement parameters with pathological prognostic factors was analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance and operator consistency was evaluated.
RESULTS: The RTs and TTPs for lower grade IDCs (grade I or II) and higher histological grade IDCs (grade III) were 9.3 s±3.9 vs. 11.4 s±5.4 (p = 0.016), 11.6 s±6.1 vs. 14.7 s±7.7 (p = 0.028), respectively. The RTs for positive-C-erbB-2 expression and negative-C-erbB-2 expression IDCs were 10.1 s±4.5 vs. 11.9 s±6.0 (p = 0.047). The IMAX showed statistical difference between IDCs with negative-ER and those with positive-ER (p = 0.003), as well as IDCs with negative-PR and those with positive-PR (p = 0.019). The ROC analysis showed that, for the differentiation ER expression, the cut-off point for IMAX was 648.8% with an Az value of 0.718 (95% CI: 0.599–0.836), and the sensitivity and specificity were 63.6% and 70.2% respectively. The intra-operator consistency of the RT, TTP, mTT and IMAX were excellent with an overall ICC of 0.893, 0.858, 0.984 and 0.800, respectively (all p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative analysis of CEUS may be a useful and objective method in predicting pathological prognostic factors in breast IDCs.
ZahariaM. and GomezH., Neoadjuvant, chemotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer, Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Publica30(1) (2013), 73–78.
2.
ChenY.P., HanT., WuR., YaoM.H., XuG., ZhaoL.X., et al., Comparison of Virtual Touch Tissue Quantification and Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification for diagnosis of solid breast tumors of different sizes, Clin Hemorheol Microcirc64(2) (2016), 235–244.
3.
YaoM.H., WuR., XuG., ZhaoL.X., LiuH., PuH., et al., A novel two-dimensional quantitative shear wave elastography to make differential diagnosis of breast lesions: Comprehensive evaluation and influencing factors, Clin Hemorheol Micro64(2) (2016), 223–233.
4.
ClaudonM., CosgroveD., AlbrechtT., BolondiL., BosioM., CalliadaF., et al., Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) - update 2008, Ultraschall in der Medizin29(1) (2008), 28–44.
5.
CokkinosD.D., AntypaE., KalogeropoulosI., TomaisD., IsmailosE., MatsirasI., et al., Contrast-enhanced ultrasound performed under urgent conditions. Indications, review of the technique, clinical examples and limitations, Insights into imaging4(2) (2013), 185–198.
6.
CaproniN., MarchisioF., PecchiA., CanossiB., BattistaR., D’AlimonteP., et al., Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: Utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI, European radiology20(6) (2010), 1384–1395.
7.
YaghanR., StantonP.D., RobertsonK.W., GoingJ.J., MurrayG.D. and McArdleC.S., Oestrogen receptor status predicts local recurrence following breast conservation surgery for early breast cancer, European Journal of Surgical Oncology: The Journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology24(5) (1998), 424–426.
8.
HarveyJ.M., ClarkG.M., OsborneC.K. and AllredD.C., Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer, Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology17(5) (1999), 1474–1481.
9.
LovekinC., EllisI.O., LockerA., RobertsonJ.F., BellJ., NicholsonR., et al., c-erbB-2 oncoprotein expression in primary and advanced breast cancer, British Journal of Cancer63(3) (1991), 439–443.
10.
DittadiR. and GionM., More about: Prognostic importance of low c-erbB2 expression in breast tumors, Journal of the National Cancer Institute92(17) (2000), 1443–1444.
11.
MussH.B., ThorA.D., BerryD.A., KuteT., LiuE.T., KoernerF., et al., c-erbB-2 expression and response to adjuvant therapy in women with node-positive early breast cancer, The New England Journal of Medicine330(18) (1994), 1260–1266.
12.
UrruticoecheaA., SmithI.E. and DowsettM., Proliferation marker Ki-67 in early breast cancer, Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology23(28) (2005), 7212–7220.
13.
PetitT., WiltM., VeltenM., RodierJ.F., FrickerJ.P., DufourP., et al., Semi-quantitative evaluation of estrogen receptor expression is a strong predictive factor of pathological complete response after anthracycline-based neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in hormonal-sensitive breast cancer, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment124(2) (2010), 387–391.
14.
PohlG., RudasM., TaucherS., StranzlT., StegerG.G., JakeszR., et al., Expression of cell cycle regulatory proteins in breast carcinomas before and after preoperative chemotherapy, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment78(1) (2003), 97–103.
15.
IgneeA., JedrejczykM., SchuesslerG., JakubowskiW. and DietrichC.F., Quantitative contrast enhanced ultrasound of the liver for time intensity curves-Reliability and potential sources of errors, European Journal of Radiology73(1) (2010), 153–158.
16.
ElstonC.W. and EllisI.O., Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: Experience from a large study with long-term follow-up, Histopathology41(3A) (2002), 154–161.
17.
YiM., HuoL., KoenigK.B., MittendorfE.A., Meric-BernstamF., KuererH.M., et al., Which threshold for ER positivity? A retrospective study based on 9639 patients, Annals of Oncology: Official Journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology25(5) (2014), 1004–1011.
18.
IwamotoT., BooserD., ValeroV., MurrayJ.L., KoenigK., EstevaF.J., et al., Estrogen receptor (ER) mRNA and ER-related gene expression in breast cancers that are 1% to 10% ER-positive by immunohistochemistry, Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology30(7) (2012), 729–734.
19.
Penault-LlorcaF., AndreF., SaganC., Lacroix-TrikiM., DenouxY., VerrieleV., et al., Ki67 expression and docetaxel efficacy in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, Journal of Clinical Oncology: Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology27(17) (2009), 2809–2815.
20.
WanC.F., DuJ., FangH., LiF.H., ZhuJ.S., LiuQ., Enhancement patterns and parameters of breast cancers at contrast-enhanced US: Correlation with prognostic factors, Radiology262(2) (2012), 450–459.
21.
WolffA.C., HammondM.E., HicksD.G., DowsettM., McShaneL.M., AllisonK.H., et al., Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update, Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine138(2) (2014), 241–256.
22.
WanC., DuJ., FangH., LiF. and WangL., Evaluation of breast lesions by contrast enhanced ultrasound: Qualitative and quantitative analysis, European Journal of Radiology81(4) (2012), e444–e450.
23.
BalleyguierC., OpolonP., MathieuM.C., AthanasiouA., GarbayJ.R., DelalogeS., et al., New potential and applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the breast: Own investigations and review of the literature, European Journal of Radiology69(1) (2009), 14–23.
24.
ZhaoH., XuR., OuyangQ., ChenL., DongB. and HuihuaY., Contrast-enhanced ultrasound is helpful in the differentiation of malignant and benign breast lesions, European Journal of Radiology73(2) (2010), 288–293.
25.
LessJ.R., SkalakT.C., SevickE.M. and JainR.K., Microvascular architecture in a mammary carcinoma: Branching patterns and vessel dimensions, Cancer Research51(1) (1991), 265–273.
26.
KedarR.P., CosgroveD., McCreadyV.R., BamberJ.C. and CarterE.R., Microbubble contrast agent for color Doppler US: Effect on breast masses. Work in progress, Radiology198(3) (1996), 679–686.
27.
PinderS.E., EllisI.O., GaleaM., O’RoukeS., BlameyR.W. and ElstonC.W., Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion: Relationship with recurrence and survival in a large study with long-term follow-up, Histopathology24(1) (1994), 41–47.
28.
LockerA.P., EllisI.O., MorganD.A., ElstonC.W., MitchellA. and BlameyR.W., Factors influencing local recurrence after excision and radiotherapy for primary breast cancer, The British Journal of Surgery76(9) (1989), 890–894.
29.
ColpaertC., VermeulenP., van BeestP., GoovaertsG., WeylerJ., Van DamP., et al., Intratumoral hypoxia resulting in the presence of a fibrotic focus is an independent predictor of early distant relapse in lymph node-negative breast cancer patients, Histopathology39(4) (2001), 416–425.
30.
PuttiT.C., El-RehimD.M., RakhaE.A., PaishC.E., LeeA.H., PinderS.E., et al., Estrogen receptor-negative breast carcinomas: A review of morphology and immunophenotypical analysis, Modern Pathology: An Official Journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc18(1) (2005), 26–35.
31.
BuaduL.D., MurakamiJ., MurayamaS., HashiguchiN., SakaiS., MasudaK., et al., Breast lesions: Correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis, Radiology200(3) (1996), 639–649.
32.
BosR., van DiestP.J., van der GroepP., ShvartsA., GreijerA.E. and van der WallE., Expression of hypoxia-inducible factor-1alpha and cell cycle proteins in invasive breast cancer are estrogen receptor related, Breast Cancer Research: BCR6(4) (2004), R450–R459.
33.
IwaseH., AndoY., IchiharaS., ToyoshimaS., NakamuraT., KaramatsuS., et al., Immunohistochemical analysis on biological markers in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, Breast Cancer8(2) (2001), 98–104.
34.
KookS.H. and KwagH.J., Value of contrast-enhanced power Doppler sonography using a microbubble echo-enhancing agent in evaluation of small breast lesions, Journal of Clinical Ultrasound: JCU31(5) (2003), 227–238.
35.
GownA.M., Current issues in ER and HER2 testing by IHC in breast cancer, Modern Pathology: An Official Journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc21(Suppl 2) (2008), S8–S15.
36.
ZenkJ., BozzatoA., HornungJ., GottwaldF., RabeC., GillS., et al., Neck lymph nodes: Prediction by computer-assisted contrast medium analysis?Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology33(2) (2007), 246–253.
