Automated volumetric radiomic analysis of breast cancer vascularization improves survival prediction in primary breast cancer.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 02 2020
28 02 2020
Historique:
received:
07
01
2019
accepted:
04
02
2020
entrez:
1
3
2020
pubmed:
1
3
2020
medline:
11
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To investigate whether automated volumetric radiomic analysis of breast cancer vascularization (VAV) can improve survival prediction in primary breast cancer. 314 consecutive patients with primary invasive breast cancer received standard clinical MRI before the initiation of treatment according to international recommendations. Diagnostic work-up, treatment, and follow-up was done at one tertiary care, academic breast-center (outcome: disease specific survival/DSS vs. disease specific death/DSD). The Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) was used as the reference method with which to predict survival of breast cancer. Based on the MRI scans, VAV was accomplished by commercially available, FDA-cleared software. DSD served as endpoint. Integration of VAV into the NPI gave NPI
Identifiants
pubmed: 32111898
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-60393-9
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-60393-9
pmc: PMC7048934
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3664Références
SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Female Breast Cancer. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html (2019).
Kurian, A. W. & Friese, C. R. Precision Medicine in Breast Cancer Care: An Early Glimpse of Impact. JAMA Oncology 1, 1109 (2015).
pubmed: 26313021
doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2719
Friese, C. R. et al. Chemotherapy decisions and patient experience with the recurrence score assay for early-stage breast cancer: Breast Cancer Recurrence Scores. Cancer 123, 43–51 (2017).
pubmed: 27775837
doi: 10.1002/cncr.30324
pmcid: 27775837
Biomarkers Definitions Working Group. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: Preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 69, 89–95 (2001).
doi: 10.1067/mcp.2001.113989
Fong, Y. et al. The Nottingham Prognostic Index: five- and ten-year data for all-cause Survival within a Screened Population. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England 97, 137–139 (2015).
pubmed: 25723691
doi: 10.1308/003588414X14055925060514
pmcid: 25723691
Haybittle, J. L. et al. A prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer 45, 361–366 (1982).
pubmed: 7073932
pmcid: 2010939
doi: 10.1038/bjc.1982.62
Todd, J. H. et al. Confirmation of a prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer 56, 489–492 (1987).
pubmed: 3689666
pmcid: 2001834
doi: 10.1038/bjc.1987.230
Blamey, R. W. et al. Survival of invasive breast cancer according to the Nottingham Prognostic Index in cases diagnosed in 1990–1999. European Journal of Cancer 43, 1548–1555 (2007).
pubmed: 17321736
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2007.01.016
pmcid: 17321736
Kaiser, W. MRI of the female breast. First clinical results. Arch. Int. Physiol. Biochim. 93, 67–76 (1985).
pubmed: 2424392
pmcid: 2424392
Pediconi, F. et al. Color-coded automated signal intensity curves for detection and characterization of breast lesions: preliminary evaluation of a new software package for integrated magnetic resonance-based breast imaging. Invest Radiol 40, 448–457 (2005).
pubmed: 15973137
doi: 10.1097/01.rli.0000167427.33581.f3
Baltzer, P. A. et al. Computer Assisted Analysis of MR-Mammography Reveals Association Between Contrast Enhancement and Occurrence of Distant Metastasis. Technology in cancer research & treatment (2012).
Kim, J. J. et al. Computer-aided Diagnosis-generated Kinetic Features of Breast Cancer at Preoperative MR Imaging: Association with Disease-free Survival of Patients with Primary Operable Invasive Breast Cancer. Radiology 162079, https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017162079 (2017).
pubmed: 28253106
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017162079
Johansen, R. et al. Predicting survival and early clinical response to primary chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced breast cancer using DCE-MRI. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 29, 1300–1307 (2009).
pubmed: 19472387
doi: 10.1002/jmri.21778
Li, S. P. et al. Use of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging to predict survival in patients with primary breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiology 260, 68–78 (2011).
pubmed: 21502383
doi: 10.1148/radiol.11102493
Pickles, M. D., Lowry, M. & Gibbs, P. Pretreatment Prognostic Value of Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Vascular, Texture, Shape, and Size Parameters Compared With Traditional Survival Indicators Obtained From Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Patients. Investigative Radiology 51, 177–185 (2016).
pubmed: 26561049
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000222
Dietzel, M. et al. Association between survival in patients with primary invasive breast cancer and computer aided MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 37, 146–155 (2013).
pubmed: 23011784
doi: 10.1002/jmri.23812
Dietzel, M. et al. Potential of MR mammography to predict tumor grading of invasive breast cancer. Rofo 183, 826–833 (2011).
pubmed: 21442559
doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1273244
Hylton, N. M. et al. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Functional Tumor Volume by MR Imaging Predicts Recurrence-free Survival—Results from the ACRIN 6657/CALGB 150007 I-SPY 1 TRIAL. Radiology 279, 44–55 (2016).
pubmed: 26624971
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015150013
Hylton, N. M. et al. Locally Advanced Breast Cancer: MR Imaging for Prediction of Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy—Results from ACRIN 6657/I-SPY TRIAL. Radiology 263, 663–672 (2012).
pubmed: 22623692
pmcid: 3359517
doi: 10.1148/radiol.12110748
Gillies, R. J., Kinahan, P. E. & Hricak, H. Radiomics: Images Are More than Pictures, They Are Data. Radiology 278, 563–577 (2016).
pubmed: 26579733
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015151169
pmcid: 26579733
Hudis, C. A. et al. Proposal for standardized definitions for efficacy end points in adjuvant breast cancer trials: the STEEP system. J. Clin. Oncol. 25, 2127–2132 (2007).
pubmed: 17513820
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.10.3523
pmcid: 17513820
Kweldam, C. F., Wildhagen, M. F., Bangma, C. H. & van. Leenders, G. J. L. H. Disease-specific death and metastasis do not occur in patients with Gleason score ≤6 at radical prostatectomy. BJU International 116, 230–235 (2015).
pubmed: 25060593
doi: 10.1111/bju.12879
pmcid: 25060593
Survival analysis. MedCalc https://www.medcalc.org/manual/kaplan-meier.php (2019).
Fattaneh, A. & Tavassoli, P. Tumours of the breast. in World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology and Genetics.Tumours of the Breast and Female Genital Organs 9–112 (IARC Press, 2003).
Edge, S., Byrd, D., Carducci, M. & Wittekind, C. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. (Springer, 2009).
Hammond, M. E. H. et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Recommendations for Immunohistochemical Testing of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptors in Breast Cancer. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 134(6), 907–922 (2010).
Wolff, A. C. et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 131, 18–43 (2007).
pubmed: 19548375
pmcid: 19548375
Mann, R. M., Kuhl, C. K., Kinkel, K. & Boetes, C. Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol 18, 1307–1318 (2008).
pubmed: 18389253
pmcid: 2441490
doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-0863-7
Morris, E. A. et al. ACR BI-RADS® Magnetic Resonance Imaging. in ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (American College of Radiology, 2013).
Dietzel, M. & Baltzer, P. A. T. How to use the Kaiser score as a clinical decision rule for diagnosis in multiparametric breast MRI: a pictorial essay. Insights into Imaging 9, 325 (2018).
pubmed: 29616496
pmcid: 5990997
doi: 10.1007/s13244-018-0611-8
Antolini, L., Boracchi, P. & Biganzoli, E. A time-dependent discrimination index for survival data. Stat Med 24, 3927–3944 (2005).
pubmed: 16320281
doi: 10.1002/sim.2427
DeLong, E. R., DeLong, D. M. & Clarke-Pearson, D. L. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44, 837–845 (1988).
pubmed: 3203132
doi: 10.2307/2531595
Oikonomou, E. K. et al. Non-invasive detection of coronary inflammation using computed tomography and prediction of residual cardiovascular risk (the CRISP CT study): a post-hoc analysis of prospective outcome data. The Lancet 392, 929–939 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31114-0
Youden, W. J. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 3, 32–35 (1950).
pubmed: 15405679
doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>3.0.CO;2-3
Boiesen, P. et al. Histologic grading in breast cancer–reproducibility between seven pathologic departments. South Sweden Breast Cancer Group. Acta Oncol 39, 41–45 (2000).
pubmed: 10752652
doi: 10.1080/028418600430950
Potosky, A. L. et al. Population-based study of the effect of gene expression profiling on adjuvant chemotherapy use in breast cancer patients under the age of 65 years: Breast Cancer Genetics and Chemotherapy. Cancer 121, 4062–4070 (2015).
pubmed: 26291519
pmcid: 4635042
doi: 10.1002/cncr.29621
Barcenas, C. H. et al. Outcomes in patients with early-stage breast cancer who underwent a 21-gene expression assay: Outcomes With 21-Gene Expression. Cancer 123, 2422–2431 (2017).
pubmed: 28199747
pmcid: 5568788
doi: 10.1002/cncr.30618
Verschraegen, C. et al. Modeling the Effect of Tumor Size in Early Breast Cancer. Ann Surg 241, 309–318 (2005).
pubmed: 15650642
pmcid: 1356917
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000150245.45558.a9
Reed, A. E. M., Kutasovic, J. R., Lakhani, S. R. & Simpson, P. T. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: morphology, biomarkers and’omics. Breast Cancer Research 17, 12 (2015).
doi: 10.1186/s13058-015-0519-x
Folkman, J. What Is the Evidence That Tumors Are Angiogenesis Dependent? J Natl Cancer Inst 82, 4–7 (1990).
pubmed: 1688381
doi: 10.1093/jnci/82.1.4
pmcid: 1688381
Folkman, J. Role of angiogenesis in tumor growth and metastasis. Semin. Oncol. 29, 15–18 (2002).
pubmed: 12516034
doi: 10.1053/sonc.2002.37263
pmcid: 12516034
Uzzan, B., Nicolas, P., Cucherat, M. & Perret, G.-Y. Microvessel density as a prognostic factor in women with breast cancer: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Cancer Res. 64, 2941–2955 (2004).
pubmed: 15126324
doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-03-1957
pmcid: 15126324
Buadu, L. D. et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 200, 639–649 (1996).
pubmed: 8756909
doi: 10.1148/radiology.200.3.8756909
pmcid: 8756909
Sopik, V. & Narod, S. A. The relationship between tumour size, nodal status and distant metastases: on the origins of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 170, 647–656 (2018).
pubmed: 29693227
pmcid: 6022519
doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-4796-9
Leong, L. C. H., Gombos, E. C., Jagadeesan, J. & Fook-Chong, S. M. C. MRI Kinetics With Volumetric Analysis in Correlation With Hormonal Receptor Subtypes and Histologic Grade of Invasive Breast Cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204, W348–W356 (2015).
pubmed: 25714321
pmcid: 4851553
doi: 10.2214/AJR.13.11486
Turashvili, G. & Brogi, E. Tumor Heterogeneity in Breast Cancer. Front Med (Lausanne) 4, (2017).
Cuenod, C. A. & Balvay, D. Perfusion and vascular permeability: basic concepts and measurement in DCE-CT and DCE-MRI. Diagn Interv Imaging 94, 1187–1204 (2013).
pubmed: 24211260
doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2013.10.010
pmcid: 24211260
Dvorak, H. F. Vascular permeability factor/vascular endothelial growth factor: a critical cytokine in tumor angiogenesis and a potential target for diagnosis and therapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 20, 4368–4380 (2002).
pubmed: 12409337
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2002.10.088
pmcid: 12409337
Szabó, B. K., Aspelin, P., Wiberg, M. K. & Boné, B. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast. Analysis of kinetic and morphologic diagnostic criteria. Acta Radiol 44, 379–386 (2003).
pubmed: 12846687
pmcid: 12846687
Vieira, A. F. & Schmitt, F. An Update on Breast Cancer Multigene Prognostic Tests—Emergent Clinical Biomarkers. Front Med (Lausanne) 5, (2018).
Li, H. et al. MR Imaging Radiomics Signatures for Predicting the Risk of Breast Cancer Recurrence as Given by Research Versions of MammaPrint, Oncotype DX, and PAM50 Gene Assays. Radiology 281, 382–391 (2016).
pubmed: 27144536
pmcid: 5069147
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016152110
Dietzel, M. et al. The Necrosis Sign in Magnetic Resonance-Mammography: Diagnostic Accuracy in 1,084 Histologically Verified Breast Lesions. The Breast Journal 16, 603–608 (2010).
pubmed: 21070437
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00982.x
Pan, H. et al. 20-Year Risks of Breast-Cancer Recurrence after Stopping Endocrine Therapy at 5 Years. N Engl J Med 377, 1836–1846 (2017).
pubmed: 29117498
pmcid: 5734609
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1701830
Grimm, L. J. et al. Interobserver Variability Between Breast Imagers Using the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS MRI Lexicon. American Journal of Roentgenology 204, 1120–1124 (2015).
pubmed: 25905951
doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13047
Saha, A., Yu, X., Sahoo, D. & Mazurowski, M. A. Effects of MRI scanner parameters on breast cancer radiomics. Expert Syst Appl 87, 384–391 (2017).
pubmed: 30319179
pmcid: 6176866
doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.06.029
Cheng, Z. et al. Discrimination between benign and malignant breast lesions using volumetric quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Eur Radiol 28, 982–991 (2018).
pubmed: 28929243
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5050-2