Molecular Subtyping of Breast Cancer: Do We Define Them with B-mode US or ARFI Elastography?

Imaging properties of breast cancer molecular subtypes differ and can be recognized by radiological methods. Acoustic radiation force (ARFI) can be associated with molecular subtypes and grade of breast cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the ultrasound and ARFI elastography correlates of different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Seventy-two patients were included in the study. The lesions evaluated by B-mod ultrasound (US) and ARFI elastography methods, and US guided tru-cut biopsies were performed. Molecular subtypes were categorized as triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), luminal A and B, or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-enriched cancer at based on the immunohistochemical profiles. Clinicopathological features, B-mod US and elastographic features was analized with statistically. Luminal cancers displayed more frequently an irregular shape, posterior shadowing, echogenic rim, and a hypoechoic or complex echo pattern than TNBC (p˂0.05). While the mean shear wave velocity (SWV) value increased as the lesion size increased, there was no significant difference between the molecular subtypes. In the evaluation of Virtual Touch(TM) Tissue Imaging (VTTI); small lesions showed more frequently pattern 4b, whereas large lesions showed pattern 3. Breast radiologist should be careful, to know that a mass that has a well-defined, posterior enhancement may also be malignant. According to accepted literature data; High SWV values and imaging patterns in VTTI are helpful in this regard to us.

PDF

___

1. Yanagawa M, Ikemot K, Kawauchi S, et al. Luminal A and Luminal B (HER2 negative) subtypes of breast cancer consist of a mixture of tumors with different genotype. BMC Res Notes 2012; 5: 376.

2. Pinker K, Shitano F, Sala E, et al. Background, current role, and potential applications of radiogenomics. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018; 47: 604-620.

3. Bosch A, Eroles P, Zaragoza R, et al. Triplenegative breast cancer: molecular features,pathogenesis, treatment and current lines of research. Cancer Treat Rev 2010; 36: 206-215.

4. Au-Yong IT, Evans AJ, Taneja S, et al. Sonographic correlations with the new molecular classification of invasive breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 2342-2348.

5. Tozaki M, Isobe S, Yamaguchi M, et al. Ultrasonographic elastography of the breast using acoustic radiation force impulse technology: preliminary study. Jpn J Radiol 2011; 29: 452-456.

6. Kim SH, Seo BK, Lee J, et al. Correlation of ultrasound findings with histology, tumor grade, and biological markers in breast cancer. Acta Oncol 2008; 47: 1531-1538.

7. American College of Radiology. ACR BIRADS-US. In: ACR breast imaging reporting and data system. Reston: American College of Radiology. 2013.

8. Tozaki M, Isobe S, Sakamoto M. Combination of elastography and tissue quantification using the acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) technology for differential diagnosis of breast masses. Jpn J Radiol 2012; 30: 659-670.

9. Liu H, Zhao LX, Xu G, et al. Diagnostic value of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification for benign and malignant breast lesions with different sizes. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015; 8: 13118-13126.

10. Bloom HJG, Richarson WW. Histologic grading and prognosis in breast cancer: A study of 1709 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer 1957; 11: 353-377.

11. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, et al. Strategies for subtypes-dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1736-1747.

12. Lamb PM, Perry NM, Vinnicombe SJ, et al. Correlation between ultrasound characteristics, mammographic findings and histological grade in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol 2000; 55: 40-44.

13. Zhu X, Ying J, Wang F, et al. Estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status in invasive breast cancer: a 3,198 cases study at National Cancer Center, China. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2014; 147: 551-555.

14. Wu T, Li J, Wang D, et al. Identification of a correlation between the sonographic appearance and molecular subtype of invasive breast cancer: A review of 311 cases. Clin Imaging 2019; 53: 179-185.

15. Zhang L, Li J, Xiao Y, et al. Identifying ultrasound and clinical features of breast cancer molecular subtypes by ensemble decision. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 11085.

16. Taucher S, Rudas M, Mader RM, et al. Do we need HER-2/neu testing for all patients with primary breast carcinoma? Cancer 2003; 98: 2547-2553.

17. Boisserie-Lacroix M, Macgrogan G, Debled M, et al. Triple-negative breast cancers: associations between imaging and pathological findings for triple-negative tumors compared with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative breast cancers. Oncologist 2013; 18: 802-811.

18. Elkabets M, Gifford AM, Scheel C, et al. Human tumors instigate granulin expressing hematopoietic cells that promote malignancy by activating stromal fibroblasts in mice. J Clin Invest 2011; 121: 784-799.

19. Evans AJ, Rakha EA, Pinder SE, et al. Basal phenotype: a powerful prognostic factor in small screen-detected invasive breast cancer with long-term follow up. J Med Screen 2007; 14: 210-214.

20. Youk JH, Gweon HM, Son EJ, et al. Shearwave elastography of invasive breast cancer: correlation between quantitative mean elasticity value and immunohistochemical profile. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013; 138: 119-126.

21. Evans A, Whelehan P, Thomson K, et al. Invasive breast cancer: relationship between shear-wave elastographic findings and histologic prognostic factors. Radiology 2012; 263: 673-677.

22. Boisserie-Lacroix M, Mac Grogan G, Debled M, et al. Radiological features of triplenegative breast cancers (73 cases). Diagn Interv Imaging 2012; 93: 183-190.