Share：
Share this content in WeChat
X
[Chinese][PDF]2892
• Clinical Article •
Diagnostic value analysis of multimodal magnetic resonance imaging combined with prognostic factors in HER-2 low expression breast cancer
ZOU Ziqin  HUANG Yanfang  YANG Yu 

Cite this article as: ZOU Z Q, HUANG Y F, YANG Y. Diagnostic value analysis of multimodal magnetic resonance imaging combined with prognostic factors in HER-2 low expression breast cancer[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2023, 14(11): 48-55. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.11.009.


[Abstract] Objective To investigate the diagnostic value of multiparametric MRI image features and related parameters for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) low expression breast cancer, to predict the expression status of prognostic factors within the tumor tissue, and to summarize the characteristics of MRI signs of HER-2 low expression breast cancer.Materials and Methods Fifty-two patients with HER-2 low-expression breast cancer who received treatment from January 1, 2014 to April 12, 2022 were selected as subjects for retrospective study. The MRI sign characteristics of HER-2 low expression breast cancer were analyzed. The results of immunohistochemical staining examination were also used as the gold standard, and the results were analyzed according to the prognostic factors [estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), marker of proliferation Ki-67 (Ki-67), and the positive/positive ratio of HER-2] positive/negative expression were grouped four times. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate the consistency of the results of the basic characterization of MRI images between different physicians. Depending on the type of raw data, the differences of each parameter between the groups were compared and analyzed using one-way analysis (independent samples t-test, Fisher's exact probability method, Mann-Whitney U-test, etc.), respectively, and a joint diagnostic model was established by using biclassified logistic regression analysis to compare the differences of the basic clinicopathological and MRI signs among the four groups, which led to the conclusion that the differences of the basic clinicopathological and MRI signs between the four groups of HER-2 low The common MRI signs of HER-2 low expression breast cancer were characterized, and the correlation between clinical imaging features and prognostic factors was explored.Results The results of basic characterization of MRI images were in good agreement between different physicians (ICC range 0.883-0.972). HER-2 low-expression breast cancer clinicopathologically and on MRI mostly showed age 29-74 (51.10±10.67) years old, pathologic type: non-specific invasive breast cancer accounted for the majority (50/52, 96.2%); histologic grading was predominantly Ⅱ-Ⅲ (47/54, 87.0%); MRI signs mostly showed a single lesion (41/52, 78.8%), burr edges (33/52, 63.5%), lobular signs (30/52, 61.5%), internal inhomogeneous enhancement (36/52, 69.2%), time intensity curve (TIC) type Ⅲ predominantly (46/52, 88.5%), and almost no or small amount of background parenchymal The mean value of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) was about (0.767±0.143)×10-3 mm2/s, and the range of values was (0.512-1.200)×10-3 mm2/s. The prognostic value of clinicopathological and MRI features on prognostic factors: ER, PR, and TIC. Predictive value: In the ER and PR positive group, burr sign was mostly seen at the edge of the mass (ER and PR positive: 72.1%, P=0.008), internal enhancement was more heterogeneous (ER positive: 76.7%, P=0.030, PR positive: 79.1%, P=0.003), and histologic grading was lower (ER positive: P=0.008, PR positive: P=0.003). In the ER and PR negative group, there were more blurred margins (ER and PR negative: 55.6%, P=0.008), and internal enhancement was predominantly circumferential (ER negative: 66.7%, P=0.030, PR negative: 77.8%, P=0.003). In the Ki-67 positive group, the morphology of the mass was more lobular (68.2%, P=0.034) compared to the negative group, with a higher histologic grading was higher (P=0.003). Two-category logistic regression analysis suggested that histologic grading was an independent correlate for predicting the expression of ER, PR, and Ki-67 in HER-2 low-expressing breast cancers (P=0.032, P=0.022, P=0.003), and internal enhancement features were an independent correlate for predicting the expression of ER and PR in HER-2 low-expressing breast cancers (P=0.041, P=0.014).Conclusions The clinicopathologic and MRI features of HER-2 low-expression breast cancer have certain specificity, and multiparametric MRI is valuable for the early clinical diagnosis of HER-2 low-expression breast cancer and the prediction of the expression status of its related prognostic factors.
[Keywords] breast cancer；HER-2 low expression breast cancer；human epidermal growth factor receptor-2；prognostic factors；magnetic resonance imaging

ZOU Ziqin   HUANG Yanfang   YANG Yu*  

Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changsha 410021, China

Corresponding author: YANG Y, E-mail: 178693936@qq.com

Conflicts of interest   None.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province (No. 2022JJ70114).
Received  2023-04-13
Accepted  2023-10-31
DOI: 10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.11.009
Cite this article as: ZOU Z Q, HUANG Y F, YANG Y. Diagnostic value analysis of multimodal magnetic resonance imaging combined with prognostic factors in HER-2 low expression breast cancer[J]. Chin J Magn Reson Imaging, 2023, 14(11): 48-55. DOI:10.12015/issn.1674-8034.2023.11.009.

[1]
GAMPENRIEDER S P, RINNERTHALER G, TINCHON C, et al. Landscape of HER2-low metastatic breast cancer (MBC): results from the Austrian AGMT_MBC-Registry[J/OL]. Breast Cancer Res, 2021, 23(1): 112 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34906198/. DOI: 10.1186/s13058-021-01492-x.
[2]
PEREZ E A, HURVITZ S A, AMLER L C, et al. Relationship between HER2 expression and efficacy with first-line trastuzumab emtansine compared with trastuzumab plus docetaxel in TDM4450g: a randomized phase Ⅱ study of patients with previously untreated HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer[J/OL]. Breast Cancer Res, 2014, 16(3): R50 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24887458/. DOI: 10.1186/bcr3661.
[3]
SHIN J K, KIM J Y. Dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MRI of estrogen receptor-positive invasive breast cancers: associations between quantitative MR parameters and Ki-67 proliferation status[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2017, 45(1): 94-102. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25348.
[4]
PAN Y B, YUAN Y F, LIU G S, et al. P53 and Ki-67 as prognostic markers in triple-negative breast cancer patients[J/OL]. PLoS One, 2017, 12(2): e0172324 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28235003/. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172324.
[5]
WANG X M, PENG L S, WANG X X, et al. Analysis of the efficacy and survival outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients with different HER-2 expression levels[J]. China J Gen Surg, 2023, 32(5): 739-751. DOI: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2023.05.014.
[6]
ZHANG Y. Correlation between CT features and expressions of ER, PR, HER-2 in axillary metastatic lymph nodes of breast cancer[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Medical University, 2022. DOI: 10.27433/d.cnki.gxyku.2022.000119.
[7]
NET J M, WHITMAN G J, MORRIS E, et al. Relationships between human-extracted MRI tumor phenotypes of breast cancer and clinical prognostic indicators including receptor status and molecular subtype[J]. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol, 2019, 48(5): 467-472. DOI: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2018.08.003.
[8]
XU L N, TANG Z X, LI S B, et al. Study on 3.0T MRI imaging features and clinicopathological features of breast cancer[J]. Chin J CT MRI, 2021, 19(5): 43-45, 74. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-5131.2021.05.015.
[9]
HORVAT J V, BERNARD-DAVILA B, HELBICH T H, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) mapping as a quantitative imaging biomarker for prediction of immunohistochemical receptor status, proliferation rate, and molecular subtypes of breast cancer[J]. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2019, 50(3): 836-846. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.26697.
[10]
LU Y L, WAN H Y, WU J. Relationship between MRI signs of breast cancer and biological indicators of ER, Her-2 and Ki-67[J]. J Mol Diagn Ther, 2022, 14(8): 1287-1291. DOI: 10.19930/j.cnki.jmdt.2022.08.008.
[11]
IKINK G J, BOER M, BAKKER E R M, et al. Insertional mutagenesis in a HER2-positive breast cancer model reveals ERAS as a driver of cancer and therapy resistance[J]. Oncogene, 2018, 37(12): 1594-1609. DOI: 10.1038/s41388-017-0031-0.
[12]
ZUO W W, QI S, LIU Y H. Relationship between X-ray edge burr sign, edge lobulation sign and biological factors and molecular typing of breast cancer patients[J]. China Med Devices, 2022, 37(12): 82-86. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-1633.2022.12.016.
[13]
XIA S, WANG C J, WANG Y, et al. Value of deep lobulation and short burr in the diagnosis of cavitary lung cancer[J]. Chin Remedies Clin, 2021, 21(14): 2469-2470. DOI: 10.11655/zgywylc2021.14.017.
[14]
CHEN J H, NALCIOGLU O, SU M Y. MR imaging features of invasive breast cancer correlated with hormonal receptors: does progesterone receptor matter?[J]. Ann Oncol, 2008, 19(5): 1024-1026. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdn120.
[15]
HUANG W. Expression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor in breast cancer tissues[J]. Matern Child Heath Care China, 2023, 38(8): 1496-1499. DOI: 10.19829/j.zgfybj.issn.1001-4411.2023.08.036.
[16]
YUAN C R, JIN F, GUO X L, et al. Correlation analysis of breast cancer DWI combined with DCE-MRI imaging features with molecular subtypes and prognostic factors[J/OL]. J Med Syst, 2019, 43(4): 83 [2023-04-14]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30810823/. DOI: 10.1007/s10916-019-1197-5.
[17]
HE X, ZHOU J, YE S, et al. Differences in tumour heterogeneity based on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI between tumour and peritumoural stroma for predicting Ki-67 status of invasive ductal carcinoma[J/OL]. Clin Radiol, 2021, 76(6) [2023-04-14]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33648758/. DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2020.12.008.
[18]
ZHANG J P, LU N, WEN X W. Expressions of CK5/6, EGFR, AR and Ki67 in breast cancer patients with different clinicopathological features and their clinical significance[J]. Clin Educ Gen Pract, 2023, 21(6): 491-494, 476. DOI: 10.13558/j.cnki.issn1672-3686.2023.006.004.
[19]
ZHANG Y W, ZHENG S Y, WANG X R, et al. Correlation between 3.0 T MRI features and Ki-67 expression in breast cancer[J]. Diagn Imag Interv Radiol, 2023, 32(3): 182-187.
[20]
MEYER H J, MARTIN M, DENECKE T. DWI of the breast- possibilities and limitations[J]. Rofo, 2022, 194(9): 966-974. DOI: 10.1055/a-1775-8572.
[21]
KAZAMA T, TAKAHARA T, HASHIMOTO J. Breast cancer subtypes and quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: a systemic review[J/OL]. Life, 2022, 12(4): 490 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35454981/. DOI: 10.3390/life12040490.
[22]
LIU J R, XU M Y, REN J L, et al. Synthetic MRI, multiplexed sensitivity encoding, and BI-RADS for benign and malignant breast cancer discrimination[J/OL]. Front Oncol, 2023, 12: 1080580 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36818669/. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.1080580.
[23]
LUO N B, JI Y N, HUANG X Y, et al. Changes in apparent diffusion coefficient as surrogate marker for changes in ki-67 index due to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with invasive breast cancer[J]. Acad Radiol, 2019, 26(10): 1352-1357. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2019.01.007.
[24]
FAN M, YUAN W, ZHAO W R, et al. Joint prediction of breast cancer histological grade and ki-67 expression level based on DCE-MRI and DWI radiomics[J]. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform, 2020, 24(6): 1632-1642. DOI: 10.1109/JBHI.2019.2956351.
[25]
SONG S E, BAE M S, CHANG J M, et al. MR and mammographic imaging features of HER2-positive breast cancers according to hormone receptor status: a retrospective comparative study[J]. Acta Radiol, 2017, 58(7): 792-799. DOI: 10.1177/0284185116673119.
[26]
QIN Y J, WU F, HU Q L, et al. Histogram analysis of multi-model high-resolution diffusion-weighted MRI in breast cancer: correlations with molecular prognostic factors and subtypes[J/OL]. Front Oncol, 2023, 13: 1139189 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37188173/. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1139189.
[27]
YANG Z L, LI Y, ZHAN C A, et al. Evaluation of suspicious breast lesions with diffusion kurtosis MR imaging and connection with prognostic factors[J/OL]. Eur J Radiol, 2021, 145: 110014 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34749223/. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110014.
[28]
CHOI S Y, CHANG Y W, PARK H J, et al. Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficiency values on diffusion-weighted imaging with prognostic factors for breast cancer[J/OL]. Br J Radiol, 2012, 85(1016): e474-e479 [2023-04-13]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22128125/. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/79381464.
[29]
MODI S N, JACOT W, YAMASHITA T, et al. Trastuzumab deruxtecan in previously treated HER2-low advanced breast cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2022, 387(1): 9-20. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2203690.
[30]
MODI S N, PARK H, MURTHY R K, et al. Antitumor activity and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with HER2-low-expressing advanced breast cancer: results from a phase ib study[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38(17): 1887-1896. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.19.02318.

PREV Value of T1WI enhanced radiomics model for predicting EGFR mutations in non-small cell lung cancer
NEXT The application value of virtual magnetic resonance elastography based on diffusion weighted imaging in focal liver lesions
  


LINK


Tel & Fax: +8610-67113815    E-mail: editor@cjmri.cn