Correlation Between Ultrasonography and Elastography Parameters and Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer in Young Women

Overview

Journal Ann Med

Publisher Informa Healthcare

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2024 Dec 28

PMID 39731510

Authors

Dian-Xia Men

Hui-Zhan Li

Juan Dong

Meng-Hua Xue

Zhi-Fen Wang

Wen-Li Xiao

Ji-Ping Xue

Mei-Hong Jia

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To explore the differences of conventional ultrasound characteristics, elastic imaging parameters and clinicopathological characteristics of distinct molecular subtypes of breast cancer in young women, and to identify imaging parameters that exhibited significant associations with each molecular subtype.

Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis encompassing 310 young women with breast cancer. Observations were made regarding the ultrasonography and elastography characteristics of the identified breast lesions. Subsequently, based on immunohistochemistry results patients were classified into five distinct molecular subtypes: luminal A, luminal B (HER2-), luminal B (HER2+), HER2+, and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Clinical, pathological, and ultrasound imaging features were compared among these subtypes using binary logistic regression analysis.

Results: Statistically significant differences were observed in various parameters across the five molecular subtypes ( < 0.05), including tumor size, morphology, margins, calcification, posterior echo features, blood flow (Adler grading), and tumor hardness. Specifically, luminal A subtype exhibited propensity for spiculated margins, lower blood flow grading, and decreased hardness; luminal B subtype was characterized by angular margins; HER2+ subtype manifested higher blood flow grading, calcification, and elevated hardness. Conversely, TNBC subtype displayed smooth margins, absence of calcification, and heightened hardness.

Conclusion: Specific molecular subtypes of breast cancer have unique ultrasonic and elastic imaging characteristics.

References

Irshad A, Leddy R, Pisano E, Baker N, Lewis M, Ackerman S . Assessing the role of ultrasound in predicting the biological behavior of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013; 200(2):284-90. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.12.8781. View

Paluch-Shimon S, Cardoso F, Partridge A, Abulkhair O, Azim H, Bianchi-Micheli G . ESO-ESMO fifth international consensus guidelines for breast cancer in young women (BCY5). Ann Oncol. 2022; 33(11):1097-1118. DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2022.07.007. View

Evans A, Trimboli R, Athanasiou A, Balleyguier C, Baltzer P, Bick U . Breast ultrasound: recommendations for information to women and referring physicians by the European Society of Breast Imaging. Insights Imaging. 2018; 9(4):449-461. PMC: 6108964. DOI: 10.1007/s13244-018-0636-z. View

Swain S, Nunes R, Yoshizawa C, Rothney M, Sing A . Quantitative Gene Expression by Recurrence Score in ER-Positive Breast Cancer, by Age. Adv Ther. 2015; 32(12):1222-36. PMC: 4679789. DOI: 10.1007/s12325-015-0268-3. View

Ian T, Tan E, Chotai N . Role of mammogram and ultrasound imaging in predicting breast cancer subtypes in screening and symptomatic patients. World J Clin Oncol. 2021; 12(9):808-822. PMC: 8479344. DOI: 10.5306/wjco.v12.i9.808. View

Wang W, Tian B, Xu X, Zhang X, Wang Y, Du L . Clinical features and prognostic factors of breast cancer in young women: a retrospective single-center study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022; 307(3):957-968. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-022-06670-6. View

Aladag Kurt S, Kayadibi Y, Saracoglu M, Ozturk T, Korkmazer B, Cerit M . Prediction of Molecular Subtypes Using Superb Microvascular Imaging and Shear Wave Elastography in Invasive Breast Carcinomas. Acad Radiol. 2022; 30(1):14-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2022.04.017. View

Elston C, Ellis I . 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. Histopathology. 1991; 19(5):403-10. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.1991.tb00229.x. View

Temel E, Elverici E, Sari E, Ozsoy A, Akbas Dogan M, Kulacoglu S . Relationship of The Characteristic Imaging Findings of Breast Cancer with Molecular Subtypes in Young Women. Curr Med Imaging. 2023; . DOI: 10.2174/1573405620666230721124048. View

10.

Bullier B, MacGrogan G, Bonnefoi H, Hurtevent-Labrot G, Lhomme E, Brouste V . Imaging features of sporadic breast cancer in women under 40 years old: 97 cases. Eur Radiol. 2013; 23(12):3237-45. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-013-2966-z. View

11.

. [Expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of young breast cancer in China (2022 Edition)]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2023; 103(6):387-403. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112137-20220907-01895. View

12.

Tang L, Jin X, Yang H, He M, Chang H, Shao Z . Luminal B subtype: a key factor for the worse prognosis of young breast cancer patients in China. BMC Cancer. 2015; 15:201. PMC: 4389816. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1207-z. View

13.

Anastasiadi Z, Lianos G, Ignatiadou E, Harissis H, Mitsis M . Breast cancer in young women: an overview. Updates Surg. 2017; 69(3):313-317. DOI: 10.1007/s13304-017-0424-1. View

14.

Ganau S, Javier Andreu F, Escribano F, Martin A, Tortajada L, Villajos M . Shear-wave elastography and immunohistochemical profiles in invasive breast cancer: evaluation of maximum and mean elasticity values. Eur J Radiol. 2015; 84(4):617-22. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.12.020. View

15.

Guo R, Si J, Xue J, Su Y, Mo M, Yang B . Changing patterns and survival improvements of young breast cancer in China and SEER database, 19992017. Chin J Cancer Res. 2019; 31(4):653-662. PMC: 6736653. DOI: 10.21147/j.issn.1000-9604.2019.04.09. View

16.

Partridge A, Hughes M, Warner E, Ottesen R, Wong Y, Edge S . Subtype-Dependent Relationship Between Young Age at Diagnosis and Breast Cancer Survival. J Clin Oncol. 2016; 34(27):3308-14. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.8013. View

17.

Celebi F, Pilanci K, Ordu C, Agacayak F, Alco G, Ilgun S . The role of ultrasonographic findings to predict molecular subtype, histologic grade, and hormone receptor status of breast cancer. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2015; 21(6):448-53. PMC: 4622390. DOI: 10.5152/dir.2015.14515. View

18.

Taneja S, Evans A, Rakha E, Green A, Ball G, Ellis I . The mammographic correlations of a new immunohistochemical classification of invasive breast cancer. Clin Radiol. 2008; 63(11):1228-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2008.06.006. View

19.

Kim M, Choi N . Mammographic and ultrasonographic features of triple-negative breast cancer: a comparison with other breast cancer subtypes. Acta Radiol. 2013; 54(8):889-94. DOI: 10.1177/0284185113488580. View

20.

Goldhirsch A, Winer E, Coates A, Gelber R, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thurlimann B . Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol. 2013; 24(9):2206-23. PMC: 3755334. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt303. View