Quantitative Analysis of Clinical Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging for Evaluating Treatment Response in Human Breast Cancer

Overview

Journal Radiology

Specialty Radiology

Date 2010 Aug 18

PMID 20713609

Citations 16

Authors

Yanming Yu

Quan Jiang

Yanwei Miao

Jun Li

Shanglian Bao

Haoyu Wang

Chunxue Wu

Xiaoying Wang

Jiong Zhu

Yi Zhong

E Mark Haacke

Jiani Hu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To develop a method that combines a fixed-T1, fuzzy c-means (FCM) technique with a reference region (RR) model (T1-FCM method) to estimate pharmacokinetic parameters without measuring the arterial input function or baseline T1, or T1(0), and to demonstrate its feasibility in the assessment of treatment response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in patients with breast cancer by using data from dynamic contrast material-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging.

Materials And Methods: This study was approved by the human investigation committees of the two participating institutions. All patients gave written informed consent. A conventional dual-flip-angle gradient-echo method was used to evaluate the effects of noise and the T1 in the tissue itself on the accuracy of T1 estimation. Both conventional RR and fixed-T1 methods were used to evaluate the effects of noise and preselected T1(0) on the estimation of pharmacokinetic parameters by means of a simulation study. Thirty-three women (age range, 32-66 years; mean age, 45 years) with pathologically proved breast tumors were examined to evaluate the feasibility of using the T1-FCM method as a means of assessing treatment response to NAC. A nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess the difference in each of the MR imaging parameters between patients with a major histologic response to treatment and those with a nonmajor histologic response.

Results: With use of the dual-flip-angle method, the accuracy and distribution of T1 estimation are dependent on the T1 in the tissue itself. The T1-FCM method is more accurate than other methods and is relatively insensitive to the effects of noise and incorrect T1(0) selection. Preliminary clinical data revealed a significant difference (P < .01) in the change of the volume transfer constant after two cycles of NAC between the major and nonmajor histologic response groups.

Conclusion: Results of the simulation study demonstrate that the T1-FCM method appears to be relatively insensitive to noisy dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging data. This method could prove useful in the evaluation of breast cancer therapy.

Citing Articles

Early prediction of pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy of breast tumors: a comparative study using amide proton transfer-weighted, diffusion weighted and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI.

Zhang N, Song Q, Liang H, Wang Z, Wu Q, Zhang H Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1295478.

PMID: 38298813 PMC: 10827983. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1295478.

Pretreatment DCE-MRI-Based Deep Learning Outperforms Radiomics Analysis in Predicting Pathologic Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer.

Peng Y, Cheng Z, Gong C, Zheng C, Zhang X, Wu Z Front Oncol. 2022; 12:846775.

PMID: 35359387 PMC: 8960929. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.846775.

Contrast-free MRI quantitative parameters for early prediction of pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.

Du S, Gao S, Zhao R, Liu H, Wang Y, Qi X Eur Radiol. 2022; 32(8):5759-5772.

PMID: 35267091 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-08667-w.

Application of T1 Map Information Based on Synthetic MRI for Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Imaging: A Comparison Study with the Fixed Baseline T1 Value Method.

Shin D, Choi S, Yoo R, Kang K, Yun T, Kim J Korean J Radiol. 2021; 22(8):1352-1368.

PMID: 33987992 PMC: 8316777. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2020.1201.

Current Landscape of Breast Cancer Imaging and Potential Quantitative Imaging Markers of Response in ER-Positive Breast Cancers Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy.

Jones E, Hathi D, Freimanis R, Mukhtar R, Jo Chien A, Esserman L Cancers (Basel). 2020; 12(6).

PMID: 32527022 PMC: 7352259. DOI: 10.3390/cancers12061511.

References

Machiavelli M, Romero A, Perez J, Lacava J, Dominguez M, Rodriguez R . Prognostic significance of pathological response of primary tumor and metastatic axillary lymph nodes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast carcinoma. Cancer J Sci Am. 1998; 4(2):125-31. View

Haacke E, Filleti C, Gattu R, Ciulla C, Al-Bashir A, Suryanarayanan K . New algorithm for quantifying vascular changes in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI independent of absolute T1 values. Magn Reson Med. 2007; 58(3):463-72. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21358. View

Walker-Samuel S, Leach M, Collins D . Reference tissue quantification of DCE-MRI data without a contrast agent calibration. Phys Med Biol. 2007; 52(3):589-601. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/52/3/004. View

Deoni S, Rutt B, Peters T . Rapid combined T1 and T2 mapping using gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state. Magn Reson Med. 2003; 49(3):515-26. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.10407. View

van der Hage J, van de Velde C, Julien J, Tubiana-Hulin M, Vandervelden C, Duchateau L . Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19(22):4224-37. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.22.4224. View

Padhani A . Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in clinical oncology: current status and future directions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002; 16(4):407-22. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.10176. View

Huang W, Wang Y, Panicek D, Schwartz L, Koutcher J . Feasibility of using limited-population-based average R10 for pharmacokinetic modeling of osteosarcoma dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging data. Magn Reson Imaging. 2009; 27(6):852-8. PMC: 2722921. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2009.01.020. View

Roberts C, Issa B, Stone A, Jackson A, Waterton J, Parker G . Comparative study into the robustness of compartmental modeling and model-free analysis in DCE-MRI studies. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006; 23(4):554-63. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20529. View

Yang C, Karczmar G, Medved M, Stadler W . Estimating the arterial input function using two reference tissues in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI studies: fundamental concepts and simulations. Magn Reson Med. 2004; 52(5):1110-7. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20243. View

10.

Guo J, Reddick W, Rosen M, Song H . Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging parameters independent of baseline T10 values. Magn Reson Imaging. 2009; 27(9):1208-15. PMC: 2763042. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2009.05.015. View

11.

Padhani A, Hayes C, Assersohn L, Powles T, Makris A, Suckling J . Prediction of clinicopathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy at contrast-enhanced MR imaging: initial clinical results. Radiology. 2006; 239(2):361-74. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2392021099. View

12.

Ogston K, Miller I, Payne S, Hutcheon A, Sarkar T, Smith I . A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast. 2003; 12(5):320-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0960-9776(03)00106-1. View

13.

Yankeelov T, Luci J, Lepage M, Li R, DeBusk L, Lin P . Quantitative pharmacokinetic analysis of DCE-MRI data without an arterial input function: a reference region model. Magn Reson Imaging. 2005; 23(4):519-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2005.02.013. View

14.

Chen W, Giger M, Bick U, Newstead G . Automatic identification and classification of characteristic kinetic curves of breast lesions on DCE-MRI. Med Phys. 2006; 33(8):2878-87. DOI: 10.1118/1.2210568. View

15.

Yankeelov T, Gore J . Dynamic Contrast Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Oncology: Theory, Data Acquisition, Analysis, and Examples. Curr Med Imaging Rev. 2009; 3(2):91-107. PMC: 2760951. DOI: 10.2174/157340507780619179. View

16.

Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, Mamounas E, Brown A, Fisher E . Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16(8):2672-85. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.8.2672. View

17.

Rakow-Penner R, Daniel B, Yu H, Sawyer-Glover A, Glover G . Relaxation times of breast tissue at 1.5T and 3T measured using IDEAL. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005; 23(1):87-91. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20469. View

18.

Benjaminsen I, Graff B, Brurberg K, Rofstad E . Assessment of tumor blood perfusion by high-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: a preclinical study of human melanoma xenografts. Magn Reson Med. 2004; 52(2):269-76. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20149. View

19.

Merchant T, Obertop H, de Graaf P . Advantages of magnetic resonance imaging in breast surgery treatment planning. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1993; 25(3):257-64. DOI: 10.1007/BF00689840. View

20.

Kovar D, Lewis M, Karczmar G . A new method for imaging perfusion and contrast extraction fraction: input functions derived from reference tissues. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1998; 8(5):1126-34. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1880080519. View