Nihat TAŞDEMİR, Hakan YIRGIN, Enis ÖZTÜRK, Gözde ARSLAN, İnci Kızıldağ KIZILDAĞ YIRGIN, Ayşegül AKDOĞAN GEMİCİ, Fatma ÇELİK KABUL, Eyüp KAYA

Diffusion Weighted MR Imaging of Breast and Correlation of Prognostic Factors in Breast Cancer

Background: Through Diffusion Weighted Imaging(DWI), information related to early molecular changes,changes in the permeability of cell membranes, and earlymorphologic and physiologic changes such as cell swellingcan be obtained.Aims: We investigated the correlation between the prognosticfactors of breast cancer and apparent diffusion coefficient(ADC) in DWI sequences of malignant lesions.Study Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study.Methods: Patients who were referred to our clinic betweenSeptember 2012 and September 2013, who underwent dynamicbreast MRI before or after biopsy and whose biopsyresults were determined as malignant, were included in ourstudy. Before the dynamic analysis, DWI sequences weretaken. ADC relationship with all prognostic factors wasinvestigated. Pearson correlation test was used to comparethe numerical data, while Spearman correlation and Fisherexact tests were used to compare the categorical data. Theadvanced relationships were evaluated with linear regressionanalysis and univariate analysis. The efficiency of theparameters was evaluated using ROC analysis. The significancelevel (P) was accepted as 0.05.Results: In total, 41 female patients with an average age of49.4 years (age interval 21-77) and 44 lesions were includedinto the study. In the Pearson correlation test, no statisticallysignificant difference was determined between ADC andthe patient's age and tumor size. In the Spearman correlationtest, a statistically significant difference was determinedbetween nuclear grade (NG) and ADC (r=-0.424, p=0.04);no statistically significant correlation was observed betweenthe other prognostic factors with each other and ADC values.In the linear regression analysis, the relationship of NGwith ADC was found to be more significant alone than whencomparing all parameters (corrected r2=0.196, p=0.005).Further evaluations between the NG and ADC correlationwere carried out with ROC analysis. A statistically significantdifference was determined when NG 1 separately wascompared with NG 2 and 3 (p=0.03). A statistically significantdifference was also determined (p=0.05) in the comparisonof NG 1 with only NG 3. No statistically significantdifference was determined when NG 2 separately was comparedwith NG 1 and NG 3 and when NG 3 separately wascompared with NG 1 and 2 (p=0.431, p=0.097),Conclusion: We found that ADC values obtained by breastDWI showed a higher correlation with the NG of breastcancer, which is an important factor in the patient's treatment.Predictions can be made about NG by analyzing theADC values. Additional studies are needed, however, andthe ADC value of the lesion can be used as a prognostic factorproving the aggressiveness.

PDF

___

1. Abdalla F, Boder J, Markus R, Hashmi H, Buhmeıda A, Collan Y. Correlation of nuclear morphometry of breast cancer in histological sections with clinicopathological features and prognosis. Anticancer Res 2009;29:1771-6.
2. Donegan WL. Tumor-Related Prognostic Factors for Breast Cancer. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 1997;47:28-51. [CrossRef]
3. Gouhar GK, El -Hariri MA, Lotfy WE. Malignant breast tumours: Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient values using diffusion-weighted images and dynamic contrast-enhancement ratio with histologic grading. The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine 2011;42:451-60. [CrossRef]
4. Martincich L, Deantoni V, Bertotto I, Redana S, Kubatzki F, Sarotto I, et al. Correlations between diffusion-weighted imaging and breast cancer biomarkers. Eur Radiol 2012;22:1519-28. [CrossRef]
5. Thomassin Naggara I, De Bazelaire C, Chopier J, Bazot M, Marsault C, Trop I. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the breast: Advantages and pitfalls. Eur J Radiol 2012;82:435-6. [CrossRef]
6. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165-75. [CrossRef]
7. Segel M, Paulus D, Hortobagyi G. Advanced primary breast cancer: assessment mammography of response to induction chemotherapy. Radiology 1988;169:49-54. [CrossRef]
8. Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Kan S, Hata H, Ozaki M, Iwabuchi K, et al. ADC mapping of benign and malignant breast tumors, Magn Reson Med Sci 2005;4;35-42. [CrossRef]
9. Rubesova E, Grell AS, De Maertelaer V, Metens T, Chao SL, Lemort M. Quantitative diffusion imaging in breast cancer: a clinical prospective study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;24:319-24. [CrossRef]
10. Kuroki Y, Nasu K, Kuroki S, Murakami K, Hayashi T, Sekiguchi R, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer with the sensitivity encoding technique: analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient value. Magn Reson Med Sci 2004;3:79-85. [CrossRef
11. Lyng H, Haraldseth) , Rofstad EK. Measurement of cell density and necrotic fraction in human melanoma xenografts by diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 2000;43:828-3. [CrossRef]
12. Peters NH, Vincken KL, Van Den Bosch MA, Luijten PR, Mali WP, Bartels LW. Quantitative diffusion-weighted imaging for differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions: the influence of the choice of b values. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;31:1100-5. [CrossRef]
13. Kim SH, Cha ES, Kim HS, Kang BJ, Choi JJ, Jung JH, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer: correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficient value with prognostic factors. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;30:615-20. [CrossRef]
14. Kamitani T, Matsuo Y, Yabuuchi H, Fujita N, Nagao M, Jinnouchi M, et al. Correlations between apparent diffusion coefficient values and prognostic factors of breast cancer. Magn Reson Med Sci 2013;12:193-9. [CrossRef]
15. Razek AA, Gaballa G, Denewer A, Nada N. Invasive ductal carcinoma: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient value with pathological prognostic factors. NMR Biomed 2010;23:619-23. [CrossRef]
16. Constantini M, Belli P, Rinaldi P, Bufi E, Giardina G, Franceschini G, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging in breast cancer: relationship between apparent diffusion coefficient and tumour aggressiveness. Clin Radiol 2010;65:1005-12. [CrossRef