دورية أكاديمية
أعرض في EDS

Baseline [ 18 F]FDG PET/CT and MRI first-order breast tumor features do not improve pathological complete response prediction to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: Baseline [ 18 F]FDG PET/CT and MRI first-order breast tumor features do not improve pathological complete response prediction to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
المؤلفون: Oliveira C; Nuclear Medicine-Radiopharmacology, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal. carla.oliveira@fundacaochampalimaud.pt., Oliveira F; Nuclear Medicine-Radiopharmacology, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal., Constantino C; Nuclear Medicine-Radiopharmacology, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal., Alves C; Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal., Brito MJ; Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.; Pathology Department, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal., Cardoso F; Breast Unit, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal., Costa DC; Nuclear Medicine-Radiopharmacology, Champalimaud Clinical Centre/Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.
المصدر: European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging [Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging] 2024 Jun 26. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jun 26.
Publication Model: Ahead of Print
نوع المنشور: Journal Article
اللغة: English
بيانات الدورية: Publisher: Springer-Verlag Berlin Country of Publication: Germany NLM ID: 101140988 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1619-7089 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 16197070 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Subsets: MEDLINE
أسماء مطبوعة: Original Publication: Berlin : Springer-Verlag Berlin, 2002-
مستخلص: Purpose: To verify the ability of pretreatment [ 18 F]FDG PET/CT and T1-weighed dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to predict pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer (BC) patients.
Methods: This retrospective study includes patients with BC of no special type submitted to baseline [ 18 F]FDG PET/CT, NAC and surgery. [ 18 F]FDG PET-based features reflecting intensity and heterogeneity of tracer uptake were extracted from the primary BC and suspicious axillary lymph nodes (ALN), for comparative analysis related to NAC response (pCR vs. non-pCR). Multivariate logistic regression was performed for response prediction combining the breast tumor-extracted PET-based features and clinicopathological features. A subanalysis was performed in a patients' subsample by adding breast tumor-extracted first-order MRI-based features to the multivariate logistic regression.
Results: A total of 170 tumors from 168 patients were included. pCR was observed in 60/170 tumors (20/107 luminal B-like, 25/45 triple-negative and 15/18 HER2-enriched surrogate molecular subtypes). Higher intensity and higher heterogeneity of [ 18 F]FDG uptake in the primary BC were associated with NAC response in HER2-negative tumors (immunohistochemistry score 0, 1 + or 2 + non-amplified by in situ hybridization). Also, higher intensity of tracer uptake was observed in ALN in the pCR group among HER2-negative tumors. No [ 18 F]FDG PET-based features were associated with pCR in the other subgroup analyses. A subsample of 103 tumors was also submitted to extraction of MRI-based features. When combined with clinicopathological features, neither [ 18 F]FDG PET nor MRI-based features had additional value for pCR prediction. The only significant predictors were estrogen receptor status, HER2 expression and grade.
Conclusion: Pretreatment [ 18 F]FDG PET-based features from primary BC and ALN are not associated with response to NAC, except in HER2-negative tumors. As compared with pathological features, no breast tumor-extracted PET or MRI-based feature improved response prediction.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)
References: Arnold M, Morgan E, Rumgay H, Mafra A, Singh D, Laversanne M, et al. Current and future burden of breast cancer: global statistics for 2020 and 2040. Breast. 2022;66:15–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2022.08.010 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.breast.2022.08.010360843849465273)
Azamjah N, Soltan-Zadeh Y, Zayeri F. Global Trend of breast Cancer mortality rate: a 25-Year study. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2019;20:2015–20. https://doi.org/10.31557/apjcp.2019.20.7.2015 . (PMID: 10.31557/apjcp.2019.20.7.2015313509596745227)
Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, Mehta K, Costantino JP, Wolmark N, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384:164–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62422-8 . (PMID: 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)62422-824529560)
Spring LM, Fell G, Arfe A, Sharma C, Greenup R, Reynolds KL, et al. Pathologic Complete Response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and impact on breast Cancer recurrence and survival: a Comprehensive Meta-analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2020;26:2838–48. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.Ccr-19-3492 . (PMID: 10.1158/1078-0432.Ccr-19-3492320469987299787)
Haque W, Verma V, Hatch S, Suzanne Klimberg V, Brian Butler E, Teh BS. Response rates and pathologic complete response by breast cancer molecular subtype following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;170:559–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4801-3 . (PMID: 10.1007/s10549-018-4801-329693228)
Brandão MMS, Lopes- L, Fontes F, Araújo N, Dias T, et al. Healthcare use and costs in early breast cancer: a patient-level data analysis according to stage and breast cancer subtype. ESMO Open. 2020;5:e000984. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2020-000984 . (PMID: 10.1136/esmoopen-2020-000984332345527689066)
Oliveira C, Oliveira F, Vaz SC, Marques HP, Cardoso F. Prediction of pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy using baseline FDG PET heterogeneity features in breast cancer. Br J Radiol. 2023;96:20220655. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20220655 . (PMID: 10.1259/bjr.202206553686777310230392)
Houssami N, Turner R, Morrow M. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: meta-analysis of surgical outcomes. Ann Surg. 2013;257:249–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827a8d17 . (PMID: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827a8d1723187751)
Granzier RWY, van Nijnatten TJA, Woodruff HC, Smidt ML, Lobbes MBI. Exploring breast cancer response prediction to neoadjuvant systemic therapy using MRI-based radiomics: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol. 2019;121:108736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108736 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.10873631734639)
Ashraf A, Gaonkar B, Mies C, DeMichele A, Rosen M, Davatzikos C, Kontos D. Breast DCE-MRI kinetic heterogeneity tumor markers: Preliminary associations with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response. Translational Oncol. 2015;8:154–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranon.2015.03.005 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.tranon.2015.03.005)
Paydary K, Seraj SM, Zadeh MZ, Emamzadehfard S, Shamchi SP, Gholami S, et al. The evolving role of FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of breast Cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2019;21:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-018-1181-3 . (PMID: 10.1007/s11307-018-1181-329516387)
Soussan M, Orlhac F, Boubaya M, Zelek L, Ziol M, Eder V, Buvat I. Relationship between Tumor Heterogeneity measured on FDG-PET/CT and pathological prognostic factors in invasive breast Cancer. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e94017. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094017 . (PMID: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094017247226443983104)
Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Moretti J-L, Porcher R, Espié M, Lehmann-Che J, et al. Correlation of high 18F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:426–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1640-9 . (PMID: 10.1007/s00259-010-1640-921057787)
Lee MI, Jung YJ, Kim DI, Lee S, Jung CS, Kang SK, et al. Prognostic value of SUVmax in breast cancer and comparative analyses of molecular subtypes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med (Baltim). 2021;100:e26745. https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000026745 . (PMID: 10.1097/md.0000000000026745)
Tatar G, Özkul Ö, Alçin G. The value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT Imaging in the Evaluation of Interim Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Response in locally advanced breast Cancer. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther. 2022;31:123–9. https://doi.org/10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.44154 . (PMID: 10.4274/mirt.galenos.2022.44154357709789246305)
Yang L, Chang J, He X, Peng M, Zhang Y, Wu T, et al. PET/CT-based radiomics analysis may help to predict neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcomes in breast cancer. Front Oncol. 2022;12:849626. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.849626 . (PMID: 10.3389/fonc.2022.849626364198959676961)
Molina-García D, García-Vicente AM, Pérez-Beteta J, Amo-Salas M, Martínez-González A, Tello-Galán MJ, et al. Intratumoral heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT by textural analysis in breast cancer as a predictive and prognostic subrogate. Ann Nucl Med. 2018;32:379–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-018-1253-0 . (PMID: 10.1007/s12149-018-1253-029869770)
Li P, Wang X, Xu C, Liu C, Zheng C, Fulham MJ, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT radiomic predictors of pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020;47:1116–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-04684-3 . (PMID: 10.1007/s00259-020-04684-331982990)
Ha S, Park S, Bang JI, Kim EK, Lee HY. Metabolic radiomics for pretreatment (18)F-FDG PET/CT to characterize locally advanced breast Cancer: histopathologic characteristics, response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, and prognosis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1556. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01524-7 . (PMID: 10.1038/s41598-017-01524-7284842115431555)
Constantino CS, Oliveira FPM, Silva M, Oliveira C, Castanheira JC, Silva Â, et al. Are lesion features reproducible between (18)F-FDG PET/CT images when acquired on analog or digital PET/CT scanners? Eur Radiol. 2021;31:3071–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07390-8 . (PMID: 10.1007/s00330-020-07390-833125562)
Zwanenburg A. Radiomics in nuclear medicine: robustness, reproducibility, standardization, and how to avoid data analysis traps and replication crisis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:2638–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04391-8 . (PMID: 10.1007/s00259-019-04391-831240330)
Galavis PE, Hollensen C, Jallow N, Paliwal B, Jeraj R. Variability of textural features in FDG PET images due to different acquisition modes and reconstruction parameters. Acta Oncol. 2010;49:1012–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186x.2010.498437 . (PMID: 10.3109/0284186x.2010.498437208314894091820)
Wolff AC, Hammond MEH, Allison KH, Harvey BE, McShane LM, Dowsett M. HER2 testing in breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Clinical Practice Guideline focused Update Summary. J Oncol Pract. 2018;14:437–41. https://doi.org/10.1200/jop.18.00206 . (PMID: 10.1200/jop.18.0020629920138)
Allison KH, Hammond MEH, Dowsett M, McKernin SE, Carey LA, Fitzgibbons PL, et al. Estrogen and progesterone receptor testing in breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:1346–66. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.19.02309 . (PMID: 10.1200/jco.19.0230931928404)
Prat A, Cheang MC, Martín M, Parker JS, Carrasco E, Caballero R, et al. Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor-positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined luminal A breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:203–9. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2012.43.4134 . (PMID: 10.1200/jco.2012.43.413423233704)
Breast Tumours/edited. by WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board. 5th ed; 2019.
Soliman NA, Yussif SM. Ki-67 as a prognostic marker according to breast cancer molecular subtype. Cancer Biol Med. 2016;13:496–504. https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2016.0066 . (PMID: 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2016.0066281547825250608)
Cardoso F, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rubio IT, et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1674. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdz189 . (PMID: 10.1093/annonc/mdz18931236598)
Kaalep A, Sera T, Oyen W, Krause BJ, Chiti A, Liu Y, Boellaard R. EANM/EARL FDG-PET/CT accreditation - summary results from the first 200 accredited imaging systems. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:412–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3853-7 . (PMID: 10.1007/s00259-017-3853-729192365)
Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, Finet J, Fillion-Robin JC, Pujol S, et al. 3D slicer as an image computing platform for the quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;30:1323–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001227706903466397)
Constantino CS, Leocádio S, Oliveira FPM, Silva M, Oliveira C, Castanheira JC, et al. Evaluation of semiautomatic and deep learning-based fully automatic segmentation methods on [(18)F]FDG PET/CT images from patients with lymphoma: influence on Tumor characterization. J Digit Imaging. 2023;36:1864–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-023-00823-y . (PMID: 10.1007/s10278-023-00823-y3705989110407010)
Aerts HJWL, Velazquez ER, Leijenaar RTH, Parmar C, Grossmann P, Carvalho S, et al. Decoding tumour phenotype by noninvasive imaging using a quantitative radiomics approach. Nat Commun. 2014;5:4006. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5006 . (PMID: 10.1038/ncomms500624892406)
Bloem JL, Reijnierse M, Huizinga TWJ, van der Helm-van Mil AHM. MR signal intensity: staying on the bright side in MR image interpretation. RMD Open. 2018;4:e000728. https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000728 . (PMID: 10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000728299553876018882)
Wahid KA, He R, McDonald BA, Anderson BM, Salzillo T, Mulder S, et al. Intensity standardization methods in magnetic resonance imaging of head and neck cancer. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2021;20:88–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phro.2021.11.001 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.phro.2021.11.001348494148607477)
Yoon HJ, Kim Y, Chung J, Kim BS. Predicting neo-adjuvant chemotherapy response and progression-free survival of locally advanced breast cancer using textural features of intratumoral heterogeneity on F-18 FDG PET/CT and diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Breast J. 2019;25:373–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.13032 . (PMID: 10.1111/tbj.1303229602210)
Bouron C, Mathie C, Seegers V, Morel O, Jézéquel P, Lasla H, et al. Prognostic value of metabolic, volumetric and textural parameters of baseline [(18)F]FDG PET/CT in early triple-negative breast Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14030637 .
Caswell-Jin JL, Lorenz C, Curtis C. Molecular heterogeneity and evolution in breast Cancer. Annual Rev Cancer Biology. 2021;5:79–94. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-cancerbio-060220-014137 . (PMID: 10.1146/annurev-cancerbio-060220-014137)
Houssami N, Macaskill P, von Minckwitz G, Marinovich ML, Mamounas E. Meta-analysis of the association of breast cancer subtype and pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:3342–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2012.05.023 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.05.02322766518)
Gallivanone F, Panzeri MM, Canevari C, Losio C, Gianolli L, De Cobelli F, Castiglioni I. Biomarkers from in vivo molecular imaging of breast cancer: pretreatment 18F-FDG PET predicts patient prognosis, and pretreatment DWI-MR predicts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Magn Reson Mater Phys Biol Med. 2017;30:359–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-017-0610-7 . (PMID: 10.1007/s10334-017-0610-7)
Tello Galán MJ, García Vicente AM, Pérez Beteta J, Amo Salas M, Jiménez Londoño GA, Pena Pardo FJ, et al. Global heterogeneity assessed with (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Relation with biological variables and prognosis in locally advanced breast cancer. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol (Engl Ed). 2019;38:290–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.remn.2019.02.004 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.remn.2019.02.00431427247)
Roy S, Whitehead TD, Li S, Ademuyiwa FO, Wahl RL, Dehdashti F, Shoghi KI. Co-clinical FDG-PET radiomic signature in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:550–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05489-8 . (PMID: 10.1007/s00259-021-05489-834328530)
Granzier RWY, Ibrahim A, Primakov SP, Samiei S, van Nijnatten TJA, de Boer M, et al. MRI-Based Radiomics Analysis for the Pretreatment Prediction of Pathologic Complete Tumor Response to Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in breast Cancer patients: a Multicenter Study. Cancers. 2021;13:2447. (PMID: 10.3390/cancers13102447340700168157878)
Peng Y, Cheng Z, Gong C, Zheng C, Zhang X, Wu Z, et al. Pretreatment DCE-MRI-Based Deep Learning outperforms Radiomics Analysis in Predicting Pathologic Complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast Cancer. Front Oncol. 2022;12:846775. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.846775 . (PMID: 10.3389/fonc.2022.846775353593878960929)
Pesapane F, Rotili A, Botta F, Raimondi S, Bianchini L, Corso F, et al. Radiomics of MRI for the prediction of the pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast Cancer patients: a single Referral Centre Analysis. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13174271 .
Bitencourt AGV, Gibbs P, Rossi Saccarelli C, Daimiel I, Lo Gullo R, Fox MJ, et al. MRI-based machine learning radiomics can predict HER2 expression level and pathologic response after neoadjuvant therapy in HER2 overexpressing breast cancer. EBioMedicine. 2020;61:103042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.103042 . (PMID: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.103042330397087648120)
Di Micco R, Santurro L, Gasparri ML, Zuber V, Cisternino G, Baleri S, et al. PET/MRI for staging the axilla in breast Cancer: current evidence and the Rationale for SNB vs. PET/MRI Trials Cancers (Basel). 2021;13. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13143571 .
Jarząb M, Stobiecka E, Badora-Rybicka A, Chmielik E, Kowalska M, Bal W, et al. Association of breast cancer grade with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy assessed postoperatively. Pol J Pathol. 2019;70:91–9. https://doi.org/10.5114/pjp.2019.87101 . (PMID: 10.5114/pjp.2019.8710131556559)
Turner KM, Yeo SK, Holm TM, Shaughnessy E, Guan JL. Heterogeneity within molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2021;321:C343–54. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpcell.00109.2021 . (PMID: 10.1152/ajpcell.00109.2021341916278424677)
فهرسة مساهمة: Keywords: Breast cancer; First-order features; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Treatment response prediction; [18F]FDG PET/CT; pCR prediction
تواريخ الأحداث: Date Created: 20240626 Latest Revision: 20240626
رمز التحديث: 20240626
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-024-06815-6
PMID: 38922396
قاعدة البيانات: MEDLINE
الوصف
تدمد:1619-7089
DOI:10.1007/s00259-024-06815-6