van der Hoogt Kay J J, Schipper Robert J, Winter-Warnars Gonneke A, Ter Beek Leon C, Loo Claudette E, Mann Ritse M, Beets-Tan Regina G H
Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Insights Imaging. 2021 Dec 18;12(1):187. doi: 10.1186/s13244-021-01123-1.
This review aims to identify factors causing heterogeneity in breast DWI-MRI and their impact on its value for identifying breast cancer patients with pathological complete response (pCR) on neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). A search was performed on PubMed until April 2020 for studies analyzing DWI for identifying breast cancer patients with pCR on NST. Technical and clinical study aspects were extracted and assessed for variability. Twenty studies representing 1455 patients/lesions were included. The studies differed with respect to study population, treatment type, DWI acquisition technique, post-processing (e.g., mono-exponential/intravoxel incoherent motion/stretched exponential modeling), and timing of follow-up studies. For the acquisition and generation of ADC-maps, various b-value combinations were used. Approaches for drawing regions of interest on longitudinal MRIs were highly variable. Biological variability due to various molecular subtypes was usually not taken into account. Moreover, definitions of pCR varied. The individual areas under the curve for the studies range from 0.50 to 0.92. However, overlapping ranges of mean/median ADC-values at pre- and/or during and/or post-NST were found for the pCR and non-pCR groups between studies. The technical, clinical, and epidemiological heterogeneity may be causal for the observed variability in the ability of DWI to predict pCR accurately. This makes implementation of DWI for pCR prediction and evaluation based on one absolute ADC threshold for all breast cancer types undesirable. Multidisciplinary consensus and appropriate clinical study design, taking biological and therapeutic variation into account, is required for obtaining standardized, reliable, and reproducible DWI measurements for pCR/non-pCR identification.
本综述旨在确定导致乳腺扩散加权成像磁共振成像(DWI-MRI)异质性的因素,以及这些因素对其在识别接受新辅助全身治疗(NST)后达到病理完全缓解(pCR)的乳腺癌患者方面的价值的影响。截至2020年4月,在PubMed上进行了检索,以查找分析DWI用于识别接受NST后达到pCR的乳腺癌患者的研究。提取并评估了技术和临床研究方面的变异性。纳入了代表1455例患者/病变的20项研究。这些研究在研究人群、治疗类型、DWI采集技术、后处理(例如,单指数/体素内不相干运动/拉伸指数模型)以及随访研究时间方面存在差异。对于表观扩散系数(ADC)图的采集和生成,使用了各种b值组合。在纵向MRI上绘制感兴趣区域的方法差异很大。通常未考虑各种分子亚型导致的生物学变异性。此外,pCR的定义也各不相同。这些研究的个体曲线下面积范围为0.50至0.92。然而,在各研究之间,pCR组和非pCR组在NST前和/或期间和/或之后的平均/中位数ADC值范围存在重叠。技术、临床和流行病学异质性可能是导致DWI准确预测pCR能力出现观察到的变异性的原因。这使得基于所有乳腺癌类型的一个绝对ADC阈值来实施DWI进行pCR预测和评估是不可取的。为了获得用于识别pCR/非pCR的标准化、可靠且可重复的DWI测量值,需要多学科共识和适当的临床研究设计,同时考虑生物学和治疗差异。