Correlation of Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound Kinetics with Prognostic Factors in Invasive Breast Cancer

Overview

Journal Eur Radiol

Specialty Radiology

Date 2013 Jul 4

PMID 23821023

Citations 15

Authors

Botond K Szabo

Ariel Saracco

Ervin Tanczos

Peter Aspelin

Karin Leifland

Brigitte Wilczek

Rimma Axelsson

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To correlate contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) kinetic parameters with traditional and molecular prognostic factors in invasive breast cancer.

Methods: Seventy-five invasive breast cancers were evaluated with contrast harmonic imaging after the injection of a bolus dose of 2.4 ml sulphur hexafluoride microbubble contrast agent. The lognormal function was used for quantitative analysis of kinetic data. These parameters correlated with traditional prognostic factors (tumour size, histological type, tumour grade, axillary lymph node status) and immunohistochemical biomarkers (ER, PR and HER2 status).

Results: Statistically significant correlation was found between time-to-peak and tumour grade (P value = 0.023), PR status (P value = 0.042) and axillary node status (P value = 0.025). Wash-out ratio, measured at 21 s was significantly associated with ER status (P value = 0.042) and PR status (P value = 0.026).

Conclusions: Invasive breast carcinomas exhibiting earlier peak enhancement and faster elimination of microbubble contrast agent at CEUS are found to be associated with established predictors of poor prognosis.

Citing Articles

Current status and future perspectives of contrast-enhanced ultrasound diagnosis of breast lesions.

Ito T, Manabe H, Kubota M, Komoike Y J Med Ultrason (2001). 2024; 51(4):611-625.

PMID: 39174799 PMC: 11499542. DOI: 10.1007/s10396-024-01486-0.

Development and validation of a dynamic nomogram based on conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound for stratifying the risk of central lymph node metastasis in papillary thyroid carcinoma preoperatively.

Chen Q, Liu Y, Liu J, Su Y, Qian L, Hu X Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023; 14:1186381.

PMID: 37409231 PMC: 10319155. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1186381.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the evaluation of CXCR7-mediated angiogenesis in colon cancer.

Li X, Li Z, Li C, Wang X, Jiang B, Wang J J Cancer. 2023; 14(4):665-675.

PMID: 37057293 PMC: 10088541. DOI: 10.7150/jca.82438.

Differentiation Between Granulomatous Lobular Mastitis and Breast Cancer Using Quantitative Parameters on Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound.

Yin L, Agyekum E, Zhang Q, Pan L, Wu T, Xiao X Front Oncol. 2022; 12:876487.

PMID: 35912226 PMC: 9335943. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.876487.

Effects of contrast-enhanced ultrasound treatment on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer.

Rix A, Piepenbrock M, Flege B, von Stillfried S, Koczera P, Opacic T Theranostics. 2021; 11(19):9557-9570.

PMID: 34646386 PMC: 8490514. DOI: 10.7150/thno.64767.

References

Cuenod C, Fournier L, Balvay D, Guinebretiere J . Tumor angiogenesis: pathophysiology and implications for contrast-enhanced MRI and CT assessment. Abdom Imaging. 2006; 31(2):188-93. DOI: 10.1007/s00261-005-0386-5. View

Griebel J, Mayr N, De Vries A, Knopp M, Gneiting T, Kremser C . Assessment of tumor microcirculation: a new role of dynamic contrast MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1997; 7(1):111-9. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1880070115. View

Caproni N, Marchisio F, Pecchi A, Canossi B, Battista R, DAlimonte P . Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the characterisation of breast masses: utility of quantitative analysis in comparison with MRI. Eur Radiol. 2009; 20(6):1384-95. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1690-1. View

Massironi S, Conte D, Sciola V, Pirola L, Paggi S, Fraquelli M . Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in evaluating hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumours. Dig Liver Dis. 2010; 42(9):635-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2010.01.009. View

Ouyang Q, Chen L, Zhao H, Xu R, Lin Q . Detecting metastasis of lymph nodes and predicting aggressiveness in patients with breast carcinomas. J Ultrasound Med. 2010; 29(3):343-52. DOI: 10.7863/jum.2010.29.3.343. View

Kuhl C, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, Leutner C, Wardelmann E, Gieseke J . Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions?. Radiology. 1999; 211(1):101-10. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.211.1.r99ap38101. View

Du J, Li F, Fang H, Xia J, Zhu C . Correlation of real-time gray scale contrast-enhanced ultrasonography with microvessel density and vascular endothelial growth factor expression for assessment of angiogenesis in breast lesions. J Ultrasound Med. 2008; 27(6):821-31. DOI: 10.7863/jum.2008.27.6.821. View

Kedar R, Cosgrove D, McCready V, Bamber J, Carter E . Microbubble contrast agent for color Doppler US: effect on breast masses. Work in progress. Radiology. 1996; 198(3):679-86. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.198.3.8628854. View

Carmeliet P . Angiogenesis in life, disease and medicine. Nature. 2005; 438(7070):932-6. DOI: 10.1038/nature04478. View

10.

Folkman J . Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med. 1971; 285(21):1182-6. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM197111182852108. View

11.

Shah S, Ketterling R, Goetz M, Ingle J, Reynolds C, Perez E . Impact of American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations on HER2 interpretation in breast cancer. Hum Pathol. 2009; 41(1):103-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2009.07.001. View

12.

Saracco A, Szabo B, Aspelin P, Leifland K, Wilczek B, Celebioglu F . Differentiation between benign and malignant breast tumors using kinetic features of real-time harmonic contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Acta Radiol. 2012; 53(4):382-8. DOI: 10.1258/ar.2012.110562. View

13.

Knopp M, Weiss E, Sinn H, Mattern J, Junkermann H, Radeleff J . Pathophysiologic basis of contrast enhancement in breast tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999; 10(3):260-6. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1522-2586(199909)10:3<260::aid-jmri6>3.0.co;2-7. View

14.

Lee T, Purdie T, Stewart E . CT imaging of angiogenesis. Q J Nucl Med. 2003; 47(3):171-87. View

15.

Skaane P, Sager E, Olsen J, Abdelnoor M, Berger A, Wolff P . Diagnostic value of ultrasonography in patients with palpable mammographically noncalcified breast tumors. Acta Radiol. 1999; 40(2):163-8. DOI: 10.3109/02841859909177732. View

16.

Kuhl C . MRI of breast tumors. Eur Radiol. 2000; 10(1):46-58. DOI: 10.1007/s003300050006. View

17.

Szabo B, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Tot T, Bone B . Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol. 2003; 13(11):2425-35. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-003-2000-y. View

18.

DOnofrio M, Zamboni G, Malago R, Mantovani W, Principe F, Gallotti A . Resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: is the enhancement pattern at contrast-enhanced ultrasonography a pre-operative prognostic factor?. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2009; 35(12):1929-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2009.06.1100. View

19.

Balleyguier C, Opolon P, Mathieu M, Athanasiou A, Garbay J, Delaloge S . New potential and applications of contrast-enhanced ultrasound of the breast: Own investigations and review of the literature. Eur J Radiol. 2008; 69(1):14-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.07.037. View

20.

Mann R, Kuhl C, Kinkel K, Boetes C . Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol. 2008; 18(7):1307-18. PMC: 2441490. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-008-0863-7. View