已发表论文

乳腺癌患者新辅助化疗后通过超声和磁共振成像对病理完全缓解的预测

 

Authors Zhang K, Li J, Zhu Q, Chang C

Received 25 January 2020

Accepted for publication 25 March 2020

Published 16 April 2020 Volume 2020:12 Pages 2603—2612

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S247279

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Sanjeev Srivastava

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance for pathologic complete response (pCR) in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) between ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
Patients and Methods: A total of 1,219 breast cancer patients with 1,232 tumors who accepted US and/or MRI examination after NAC and before breast surgery were included. The diagnostic performance of US, MRI, and US plus MRI in predicting pCR was compared.
Results: The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of US for pCR were 36.2%, 90.2%, 71.0%, 67.3%, and 71.9%, respectively, while for MRI they were 44.4%, 92.9%, 75.6%, 77.7%, and 75.0%, respectively. The combination of US and MRI had increased specificity (98.0%) and PPV (86.8%), decreased sensitivity (22.5%) and NPV (68.8%), but similar accuracy (70.5%) in comparison with US or MRI alone. The prediction of pCR by imaging differed in different histological, molecular subtypes and primary tumor size.
Conclusion: Neither US nor MRI could predict a pCR with sufficient accuracy. The combination of US and MRI could not predict a pCR reliably either. The explanation of imaging for pCR should take into account histological, molecular subtypes, and primary tumor size.
Keywords: breast neoplasms, neoadjuvant therapy, pathologic complete response, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging




Figure 1 Case of false positive in MRI...