Three-dimensional Turbo-spin-echo Amide Proton Transfer-weighted and Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Imaging Mri for Triple-negative Breast Cancer: a Comparison with Molecular Subtypes and Histological Grades

Overview

Journal BMC Cancer

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Oncology

Date 2025 Mar 14

PMID 40082810

Authors

Nan Zhang

Xiali Shao

Lianyan Xu

Wei Zhu

Haiyu Wang

Rongkui Luo

Chun Yang

Xiaodan Ye

Mengsu Zeng

Caizhong Chen

Xiuzheng Yue

Zhenghong Bi

Xin Lu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To investigate associations between breast cancer molecular subtype and intravoxel incoherent motion imaging (IVIM) and amide proton transfer-weighted (APTw).

Methods: This prospective study involved 264 patients with suspected breast tumors who underwent both breast APTw and IVIM MRI. The maximum diameter of the tumor (Dmax), APT value, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), diffusion coefficient (D), pseudo diffusion coefficient (D*), and perfusion fraction (f) values along with histological subtype, grade, and prognostic factors (Ki-67, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2), were compared. APT values about biological subtypes, Ki-67 labeling index, and nuclear grades (NGs) were further analyzed.

Results: A total of 205 participants (mean age, 53 years, range 29-80) were included in the evaluation. The triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) cancers showed significantly higher D* values than the Luminal B cancers (P = 0.002), while there was no difference in Dmax, ADC, D, and APT (P = 0.068,0.318,0.432,0.089). The TN-type cancers showed significantly higher APT values than the HER2-type cancers (P = 0.002). The area under the curve (AUC) obtained from APTw, IVIM, and Dmax was 0.874. The APT had a moderate positive correlation with the unclear grade (r = 0.473, P < 0.001), and the D* had a weak positive correlation with the Ki-67 labeling index(r = 0.160, P = 0.022).

Conclusion: The TN subtype of breast cancer is associated with APT value and D* from IVIM. The APTw may be a promising method for predicting TNBC molecular subtypes.

References

Giaquinto A, Sung H, Miller K, Kramer J, Newman L, Minihan A . Breast Cancer Statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022; 72(6):524-541. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21754. View

Lehmann B, Bauer J, Chen X, Sanders M, Chakravarthy A, Shyr Y . Identification of human triple-negative breast cancer subtypes and preclinical models for selection of targeted therapies. J Clin Invest. 2011; 121(7):2750-67. PMC: 3127435. DOI: 10.1172/JCI45014. View

Lao C, Lawrenson R, Edwards M, Campbell I . Treatment and survival of Asian women diagnosed with breast cancer in New Zealand. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019; 177(2):497-505. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-019-05310-z. View

Acciavatti R, Lee S, Reig B, Moy L, Conant E, Kontos D . Beyond Breast Density: Risk Measures for Breast Cancer in Multiple Imaging Modalities. Radiology. 2023; 306(3):e222575. PMC: 9968778. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.222575. View

Grimm L . Breast MRI Provides New Opportunities to Identify Patients at Higher Risk. Radiology. 2023; 308(2):e231633. PMC: 10477502. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.231633. View

Krishnamurthy S, Poornima R, Challa V, Goud Y . Triple negative breast cancer - our experience and review. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2013; 3(1):12-6. PMC: 3372585. DOI: 10.1007/s13193-012-0138-2. View

Geyer F, Rodrigues D, Weigelt B, Reis-Filho J . Molecular classification of estrogen receptor-positive/luminal breast cancers. Adv Anat Pathol. 2011; 19(1):39-53. DOI: 10.1097/PAP.0b013e31823fafa0. View

Guiu S, Michiels S, Andre F, Cortes J, Denkert C, Di Leo A . Molecular subclasses of breast cancer: how do we define them? The IMPAKT 2012 Working Group Statement. Ann Oncol. 2012; 23(12):2997-3006. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mds586. View

Barzaman K, Karami J, Zarei Z, Hosseinzadeh A, Kazemi M, Moradi-Kalbolandi S . Breast cancer: Biology, biomarkers, and treatments. Int Immunopharmacol. 2020; 84:106535. DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2020.106535. View

10.

Uslu H, Onal T, Tosun M, Arslan A, Ciftci E, Utkan N . Intravoxel incoherent motion magnetic resonance imaging for breast cancer: A comparison with molecular subtypes and histological grades. Magn Reson Imaging. 2021; 78:35-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2021.02.005. View

11.

Crescenzi R, Donahue P, Mahany H, Lants S, Donahue M . CEST MRI quantification procedures for breast cancer treatment-related lymphedema therapy evaluation. Magn Reson Med. 2019; 83(5):1760-1773. PMC: 6982565. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.28031. View

12.

Meyer H, Wienke A, Surov A . Diffusion-Weighted Imaging of Different Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Breast Care (Basel). 2022; 17(1):47-54. PMC: 8914237. DOI: 10.1159/000514407. View

13.

Hou W, Xue Y, Qian Y, Pan H, Xu M, Shen Y . Application of Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in Predicting and Monitoring Early Efficacy of Anti-Angiogenic Therapy in the C6 Glioma Rat Model. Front Oncol. 2022; 11:842169. PMC: 8831888. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.842169. View

14.

Zhu H, Jones C, van Zijl P, Barker P, Zhou J . Fast 3D chemical exchange saturation transfer (CEST) imaging of the human brain. Magn Reson Med. 2010; 64(3):638-44. PMC: 2932772. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.22546. View

15.

Dula A, Arlinghaus L, Dortch R, Dewey B, Whisenant J, Ayers G . Amide proton transfer imaging of the breast at 3 T: establishing reproducibility and possible feasibility assessing chemotherapy response. Magn Reson Med. 2012; 70(1):216-24. PMC: 3505231. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.24450. View

16.

Krikken E, Khlebnikov V, Zaiss M, Jibodh R, van Diest P, Luijten P . Amide chemical exchange saturation transfer at 7 T: a possible biomarker for detecting early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res. 2018; 20(1):51. PMC: 6001024. DOI: 10.1186/s13058-018-0982-2. View

17.

Zhang N, Kang J, Wang H, Liu A, Miao Y, Ma X . Differentiation of fibroadenomas versus malignant breast tumors utilizing three-dimensional amide proton transfer weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Imaging. 2021; 81:15-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.09.002. View

18.

Liu Z, Wen J, Wang M, Ren Y, Yang Q, Qian L . Breast Amide Proton Transfer Imaging at 3 T: Diagnostic Performance and Association With Pathologic Characteristics. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2022; 57(3):824-833. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.28335. View

19.

Kamitani T, Sagiyama K, Yamasaki Y, Hino T, Wada T, Kubo M . Amide proton transfer (APT) imaging of breast cancers and its correlation with biological status. Clin Imaging. 2023; 96:38-43. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2023.02.002. View

20.

Togao O, Keupp J, Hiwatashi A, Yamashita K, Kikuchi K, Yoneyama M . Amide proton transfer imaging of brain tumors using a self-corrected 3D fast spin-echo dixon method: Comparison With separate B correction. Magn Reson Med. 2016; 77(6):2272-2279. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.26322. View