Investigative Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Korean Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine (대한자기공명의과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Invasive Lobular Carcinoma: MRI Features and Clinicohistological Characteristics According to the ER, PR, and HER2 Statuses

  • Yoo, Eun Young (Deparment of Radiology, Gil Hospital, Gachon University School of Medicine and Science) ;
  • Nam, Sang Yu (Deparment of Radiology, Gil Hospital, Gachon University School of Medicine and Science) ;
  • Choi, Hye-Young (Deparment of Radiology, Gil Hospital, Gachon University School of Medicine and Science) ;
  • Cho, Hyun Yee (Deparment of Pathology, Gil Hospital, Gachon University School of Medicine and Science)
  • Received : 2015.06.05
  • Accepted : 2015.07.03
  • Published : 2015.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate correlations of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) statuses with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features and clinicohistological characteristics in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). Materials and Methods: Data from 64 histologically confirmed ILCs were analyzed retrospectively. Preoperative breast MRI was reviewed for morphology and dynamic contrast-enhanced kinetics of the tumor. Pathologic reports were reviewed for ER, PR, and HER2 positivity, tumor size, lymph node metastasis, and the number of metastatic lymph nodes. Furthermore, there was an investigation of the MRI features and clinicohistologic characteristics, according to the ER, PR, and HER2 statuses. Results: A significant difference in MRI features and clinicohistological tumor characteristics were observed only in relation to PR status. Of the 64 ILCs, 10 (15.6%) were PR negative. PR negative cancers, compared with PR positive cancers, were more likely to present as non-mass enhancement (P = 0.027); have a significantly larger mean tumor size ($5.00{\pm}1.05cm$ vs. $2.57{\pm}0.21cm$, P = 0.021); and have significantly more metastatic lymph nodes (P = 0.010). Conclusion: PR negative ILC presented more frequently as non-mass enhancement on MRI, with larger tumors and increased numbers of metastatic lymph nodes. Therefore, the PR status plays an important role in determining MRI features and clinicohistological characteristics of ILC.

Keywords

References

  1. Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C. MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: a review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008;107:1-14
  2. Li CI, Anderson BO, Daling JR, Moe RE. Trends in incidence rates of invasive lobular and ductal breast carcinoma. JAMA 2003;289:1421-1424 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.11.1421
  3. Li CI, Anderson BO, Porter P, Holt SK, Daling JR, Moe RE. Changing incidence rate of invasive lobular breast carcinoma among older women. Cancer 2000;88:2561-2569 https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20000601)88:11<2561::AID-CNCR19>3.0.CO;2-X
  4. Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, Elledge RM. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res 2004;6:R149-156 https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr767
  5. Rastelli F, Crispino S. Factors predictive of response to hormone therapy in breast cancer. Tumori 2008;94:370-383 https://doi.org/10.1177/030089160809400314
  6. Kyndi M, Sorensen FB, Knudsen H, et al. Estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2, and response to postmastectomy radiotherapy in high-risk breast cancer: the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:1419-1426 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.14.5565
  7. Fernandez-Morales LA, Segui MA, Andreu X, et al. Analysis of the pathologic response to primary chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer grouped according to estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status. Clin Breast Cancer 2007;7:559-564 https://doi.org/10.3816/CBC.2007.n.012
  8. Lee SH, Cho N, Kim SJ, et al. Correlation between high resolution dynamic MR features and prognostic factors in breast cancer. Korean J Radiol 2008;9:10-18 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2008.9.1.10
  9. Montemurro F, Martincich L, Sarotto I, et al. Relationship between DCE-MRI morphological and functional features and histopathological characteristics of breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2007;17:1490-1497 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0505-x
  10. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Kristoffersen Wiberg M, Tot T, Bone B. Invasive breast cancer: correlation of dynamic MR features with prognostic factors. Eur Radiol 2003;13:2425-2435 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-003-2000-y
  11. Teifke A, Behr O, Schmidt M, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of breast lesions: correlation with microvessel distribution pattern and histologic characteristics of prognosis. Radiology 2006;239:351-360 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2392050205
  12. Morris EA, Comstock CE, Lee CH, et al. ACR BI-$RADS^{(R)}$ Magnetic Resonance Imaging. In: ACR BI-$RADS^{(R)}$ Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology, 2013.
  13. Bardou VJ, Arpino G, Elledge RM, Osborne CK, Clark GM. Progesterone receptor status significantly improves outcome prediction over estrogen receptor status alone for adjuvant endocrine therapy in two large breast cancer databases. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1973-1979 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2003.09.099
  14. Anderson H, Hills M, Zabaglo L, et al. Relationship between estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, HER-2 and Ki67 expression and efficacy of aromatase inhibitors in advanced breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2011;22:1770-1776 https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq700
  15. Chen L, Romond E, Chokshi S, et al. A prognostic model of early breast cancer relapse after standard adjuvant therapy and comparison with metastatic disease on initial presentation. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012;136:565-572 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2265-4
  16. Nishimura R, Osako T, Nishiyama Y, et al. Evaluation of factors related to late recurrence--later than 10 years after the initial treatment--in primary breast cancer. Oncology 2013;85:100-110 https://doi.org/10.1159/000353099
  17. Gelbfish GA, Davidson AL, Kopel S, et al. Relationship of estrogen and progesterone receptors to prognosis in breast cancer. Ann Surg 1988;207:75-79 https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-198801000-00015
  18. Knopfelmacher A, Fox J, Lo Y, Shapiro N, Fineberg S. Correlation of histopathologic features of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast with the oncotype DX DCIS score. Mod Pathol 2015 [Epub ahead of print]
  19. Stierer M, Rosen H, Weber R, Hanak H, Spona J, Tuchler H. Immunohistochemical and biochemical measurement of estrogen and progesterone receptors in primary breast cancer. Correlation of histopathology and prognostic factors. Ann Surg 1993;218:13-21 https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199307000-00004
  20. Dhakal HP, Naume B, Synnestvedt M, et al. Vascularization in primary breast carcinomas: its prognostic significance and relationship with tumor cell dissemination. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:2341-2350 https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4214
  21. Park SY, Kim HM, Koo JS. Differential expression of cancerassociated fibroblast-related proteins according to molecular subtype and stromal histology in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2015;149:727-741 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3291-9
  22. Chen JH, Nalcioglu O, Su MY. MR imaging features of invasive breast cancer correlated with hormonal receptors: does progesterone receptor matter? Ann Oncol 2008;19:1024-1026 https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdn120
  23. Chen JH, Baek HM, Nalcioglu O, Su MY. Estrogen receptor and breast MR imaging features: a correlation study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;27:825-833 https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21330
  24. Aitken E, Osman M. Factors affecting nodal status in invasive breast cancer: a retrospective analysis of 623 patients. Breast J 2010;16:271-278 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2009.00897.x