HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Press Release Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Yeh, E. Articles by Taghian, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Yeh, E. Articles by Taghian, A. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Prospective Comparison of Mammography, Sonography, and MRI in Patients Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Palpable Breast Cancer

¹ Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 15 Parkman St., ACC-219, Boston, MA 02114.
² Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
³ Saint Elizabeth's Medical Center, Brighton, MA.
⁴ New York University Medical Center, New York, NY.
⁵ Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114.
⁶ Department of Radiation-Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114.

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to determine the relative accuracy of mammography, sonography, and MRI in predicting residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer as compared with the gold standards of physical examination and pathology.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Forty-one women with stage IIB–III palpable breast cancer were prospectively enrolled in a study investigating the effects of sequential single-agent chemotherapy (doxorubicin followed by paclitaxel or vice versa) on tumor imaging. The study cohort consisted of the first 31 patients (age range, 31–65 years; mean, 45 years) who completed the protocol. All underwent physical examination, mammography, sonography, and MRI before and after receiving each neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic drug. Imaging studies were reviewed by two radiologists using conventional lexicons for lesion analysis, and the findings were compared with clinical response and pathology results.

RESULTS. Complete, partial, and stable clinical response as defined by clinical examination was seen in 15, 14, and two of the 31 patients, respectively. Agreement rates about the degree of response were 32%, 48%, and 55%, respectively, for mammography, sonography, and MRI compared with clinical evaluation and did not differ statistically. Agreement about the rate of response as measured by clinical examination, mammography, sonography, and MRI compared with the gold standard (pathology) was 19%, 26%, 35%, and 71%, respectively. Of the four, MRI agreed with the gold standard significantly more often (p < 0.002 for all three paired comparisons with MRI). When there was disagreement with the gold standard, none of the four exhibited a significant tendency to either under- or overestimate.

CONCLUSION. MRI appears to provide the best correlation with pathology—better than physical examination, mammography, and sonography—in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. However, MRI may overestimate (6%) or underestimate (23%) residual disease in approximately 29% of the patients (95% confidence interval, 14–48%).

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. A. Buchholz, C. D. Lehman, J. R. Harris, B. A. Pockaj, N. Khouri, N. F. Hylton, M. J. Miller, T. Whelan, L. J. Pierce, L. J. Esserman, et al. Statement of the Science Concerning Locoregional Treatments After Preoperative Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: A National Cancer Institute Conference J. Clin. Oncol., February 10, 2008; 26(5): 791 - 797. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. A. Hamstra, A. Rehemtulla, and B. D. Ross Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Biomarker for Treatment Response in Oncology J. Clin. Oncol., September 10, 2007; 25(26): 4104 - 4109. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. K. Kuhl Current Status of Breast MR Imaging * Part 2. Clinical Applications Radiology, September 1, 2007; 244(3): 672 - 691. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Cerussi, D. Hsiang, N. Shah, R. Mehta, A. Durkin, J. Butler, and B. J. Tromberg Predicting response to breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy using diffuse optical spectroscopy PNAS, March 6, 2007; 104(10): 4014 - 4019. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Shimizu, M. Ando, T. Kouno, N. Katsumata, and Y. Fujiwara Current Trends and Controversies over Pre-operative Chemotherapy for Women with Operable Breast Cancer Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., January 3, 2007; (2007) hyl122v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Loibl, G. von Minckwitz, G. Raab, J.-U. Blohmer, S. D. Costa, B. Gerber, H. Eidtmann, S. Petrich, J. Hilfrich, C. Jackisch, et al. Surgical Procedures After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Operable Breast Cancer: Results of the GEPARDUO Trial Ann. Surg. Oncol., November 1, 2006; 13(11): 1434 - 1442. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Peintinger, H. M. Kuerer, K. Anderson, J. C. Boughey, F. Meric-Bernstam, S. E. Singletary, K. K. Hunt, G. J. Whitman, T. Stephens, A. U. Buzdar, et al. Accuracy of the Combination of Mammography and Sonography in Predicting Tumor Response in Breast Cancer Patients After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Ann. Surg. Oncol., November 1, 2006; 13(11): 1443 - 1449. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. K. Shah, S. K. Shah, and K. V. Greatrex Current Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Imaging: A Primer for the Primary Care Physician J Am Board Fam Med, November 1, 2005; 18(6): 478 - 490. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]