Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced mammography vs MRI in evaluating the response of breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy

被引:0
作者
Lopez, Angela Iglesias [1 ]
Alejandro, Alberto Bouzon [2 ]
Lopez, Laura Abelairas [3 ]
Oses, Joaquin Jose Mosquera [1 ]
Romero, Jose Ramon Varela [1 ]
Chaves, Andres Vega [3 ]
机构
[1] Complejo Hosp Univ A Coruna, Dept Radiol, Unidad Mama, La Coruna, Spain
[2] Complejo Hosp Univ A Coruna, Dept Cirugia, Unidad Mama, La Coruna, Spain
[3] Complejo Hosp Univ A Coruna, Dept Radiol, La Coruna, Spain
来源
REVISTA DE SENOLOGIA Y PATOLOGIA MAMARIA | 2023年 / 36卷 / 01期
关键词
Contrast enhancement; mammography; Magnetic renonance; neoadjuvant; chemotherapy; SPECTRAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; PATIENT PREFERENCES; CESM;
D O I
10.1016/j.senol.2022.04.001
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Introduction: Magnetic resonance imaging is the most accurate diagnostic method for evaluating residual disease in breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Contrast-enhanced mammography can be an effective alternative to MRI in the evaluation of residual tumor. This technique would significantly reduce costs, improve patient flow and hardly has any contraindications. Methods: We have carried out an observational and prospective study in 43 patients with breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The pre-surgical study included both mammography with contrast injection and magnetic resonance imaging. Residual tumor size by imaging was correlated with the postoperative pathology study. Results: The CM presents a higher interclass correlation coefficient than the RM (0.9 vs. 0.7). The sensitivity and specificity values of CM (83.9% and 83.3%) are high and comparable to those of MRI (74.2% and 91.6%). Furthermore, the negative predictive value of CM is greater than that of MRI (66.7% vs 57.9%) and PPV is very similar (92.9% vs 95.8%). Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced mammography is a test comparable to magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of post-neoadjuvant tumor response in patients with breast cancer. It is also a valid test in visualizing additional lesions in the same or contralateral breast. n 2022 SESPM. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Diagnostic Value of Contrast-Enhanced Digital Mammography versus Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Preoperative Evaluation of Breast Cancer
    Kim, Eun Young
    Youn, Inyoung
    Lee, Kwan Ho
    Yun, Ji-Sup
    Park, Yong Lai
    Park, Chan Heun
    Moon, Juhee
    Choi, Seon Hyeong
    Choi, Yoon Jung
    Ham, Soo-Youn
    Kook, Shin Ho
    JOURNAL OF BREAST CANCER, 2018, 21 (04) : 453 - 462
  • [22] Impact of background parenchymal enhancement levels on the diagnosis of contrast-enhanced digital mammography in evaluations of breast cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced breast MRI
    Yuen, Sachiko
    Monzawa, Shuichi
    Gose, Ayako
    Yanai, Seiji
    Yata, Yoshihiro
    Matsumoto, Hajime
    Ichinose, You
    Tashiro, Takashi
    Yamagami, Kazuhiko
    BREAST CANCER, 2022, 29 (04) : 677 - 687
  • [23] Role of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in the assessment of residual disease following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer
    Elkassas, Hebatalla
    El-Maadawy, Samar M.
    Saad, Sherihan Mahmoud
    Radwan, Amira H.
    Gareer, Sherihan W. Y.
    EGYPTIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2022, 53 (01)
  • [24] Evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast
    Drew, PJ
    Kerin, MJ
    Mahapatra, T
    Malone, C
    Monson, JRT
    Turnbull, LW
    Fox, JN
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2001, 27 (07): : 617 - 620
  • [25] Effects of contrast-enhanced ultrasound treatment on neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer
    Rix, Anne
    Piepenbrock, Marion
    Flege, Barbara
    von Stillfried, Saskia
    Koczera, Patrick
    Opacic, Tatjana
    Simons, Nina
    Boor, Peter
    Thoroe-Boveleth, Sven
    Deckers, Roel
    May, Jan-Niklas
    Lammers, Twan
    Schmitz, Georg
    Stickeler, Elmar
    Kiessling, Fabian
    THERANOSTICS, 2021, 11 (19): : 9557 - 9570
  • [26] Contrast- Enhanced Mammography Versus MRI in the Evaluation of Neoadjuvant Therapy Response in Patients With Breast Cancer: A Prospective Study
    Bernardi, Daniela
    Vatteroni, Giulia
    Acquaviva, Alessandra
    Valentini, Marvi
    Sabatino, Vincenzo
    Bolengo, Isabella
    Pellegrini, Marco
    Fanto, Carmine
    Trimboli, Rubina M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2022, 219 (06) : 884 - 894
  • [27] Diagnostic Accuracy of MRI in Evaluating Response After Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy in Operable Breast Cancer
    Khazindar, Abdullah R.
    Hashem, Dalia Abdulmonem L.
    Abusanad, Atlal
    Bakhsh, Salwa, I
    Bin Mahfouz, Alya
    El-Diasty, Mohamed T.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2021, 13 (06)
  • [28] The performance of contrast-enhanced mammography and breast MRI in local preoperative staging of invasive lobular breast cancer
    Lobbes, Marc B. I.
    Neeter, Lidewij M. F. H.
    Raat, Frank
    Turk, Kim
    Wildberger, Joachim E.
    van Nijnatten, Thiemo J. A.
    Nelemans, Patricia J.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2023, 164
  • [29] Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography in neoadjuvant chemotherapy monitoring: a comparison with breast magnetic resonance imaging
    Iotti, Valentina
    Ravaioli, Sara
    Vacondio, Rita
    Coriani, Chiara
    Caffarri, Sabrina
    Sghedoni, Roberto
    Nitrosi, Andrea
    Ragazzi, Moira
    Gasparini, Elisa
    Masini, Cristina
    Bisagni, Giancarlo
    Falco, Giuseppe
    Ferrari, Guglielmo
    Braglia, Luca
    Del Prato, Alberto
    Malavolti, Ivana
    Ginocchi, Vladimiro
    Pattacini, Pierpaolo
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2017, 19
  • [30] Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography assessment of gastric cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy
    Jian Ang
    Liang Hu
    Pin-Tong Huang
    Jin-Xiu Wu
    Ling-Na Huang
    Chun-Hui Cao
    Yi-Xiong Zheng
    Li Chen
    World Journal of Gastroenterology, 2012, 18 (47) : 7026 - 7032