Korean Journal of Radiology

  • 제21권8호
  • /
  • Pages.946-954
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1229-6929(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-8330(eISSN)
대한영상의학회 (The Korean Society of Radiology)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features Associated with Positive Resection Margins in Patients with Invasive Lobular Carcinoma

  • Jiyoung Yoon (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Eun-Kyung Kim (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Min Jung Kim (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Hee Jung Moon (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jung Hyun Yoon (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Vivian Y. Park (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • 투고 : 2019.09.06
  • 심사 : 2020.03.03
  • 발행 : 2020.08.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: To investigate preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings associated with resection margin status in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) who underwent breast-conserving surgery. Materials and Methods: One hundred and one patients with ILC who underwent preoperative MRI were included. MRI (tumor size, multifocality, type of enhancing lesion, distribution of non-mass enhancement [NME], and degree of background parenchymal enhancement) and clinicopathological features (age, pathologic tumor size, presence of ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] or lobular carcinoma in situ, presence of lymph node metastases, and estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor/human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 status) were analyzed. A positive resection margin was defined as the presence of invasive cancer or DCIS at the inked surface. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine pre- and postoperative variables associated with positive resection margins. Results: Among the 101 patients, 21 (20.8%) showed positive resection margins. In the univariable analysis, NME, multifocality, axillary lymph node metastasis, and pathologic tumor size were associated with positive resection margins. With respect to preoperative MRI findings, multifocality (odds ratio [OR] = 3.977, p = 0.009) and NME (OR = 2.741, p = 0.063) were associated with positive resection margins in the multivariable analysis, although NME showed borderline significance. Conclusion: In patients with ILC, multifocality and the presence of NME on preoperative breast MRI were associated with positive resection margins.

키워드

과제정보

This study was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2017R1D1A1B03035995).

참고문헌

  1. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1233-1241 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022152
  2. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1227-1232 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa020989
  3. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, Harris JR, Khan SA, Horton J, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014;88:553-564 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.11.012
  4. McCahill LE, Single RM, Aiello Bowles EJ, Feigelson HS, James TA, Barney T, et al. Variability in reexcision following breast conservation surgery. JAMA 2012;307:467-475 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.43
  5. Morrow M, Jagsi R, Alderman AK, Griggs JJ, Hawley ST, Hamilton AS, et al. Surgeon recommendations and receipt of mastectomy for treatment of breast cancer. JAMA 2009;302:1551-1556 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1450
  6. Van Goethem M, Tjalma W, Schelfout K, Verslegers I, Biltjes I, Parizel P. Magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006;32:901-910 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2006.06.009
  7. Gruber IV, Rueckert M, Kagan KO, Staebler A, Siegmann KC, Hartkopf A, et al. Measurement of tumour size with mammography, sonography and magnetic resonance imaging as compared to histological tumour size in primary breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2013;13:328
  8. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, Lord SJ, Warren RM, Dixon JM, et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3248-3258 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.2108
  9. Kang JH, Youk JH, Kim JA, Gweon HM, Eun NL, Ko KH, et al. Identification of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging features associated with positive resection margins in breast cancer: a retrospective study. Korean J Radiol 2018;19:897-904 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.5.897
  10. Dashevsky BZ, Oh JH, Apte AP, Bernard-Davila B, Morris EA, Deasy JO, et al. MRI features predictive of negative surgical margins in patients with HER2 overexpressing breast cancer undergoing breast conservation. Sci Rep 2018;8:315
  11. Gweon HM, Jeong J, Son EJ, Youk JH, Kim JA, Ko KH. The clinical significance of accompanying NME on preoperative MR imaging in breast cancer patients. PLoS One 2017;12:e0178445
  12. Kuhl CK, Strobel K, Bieling H, Wardelmann E, Kuhn W, Maass N, et al. Impact of preoperative breast MR imaging and MR-guided surgery on diagnosis and surgical outcome of women with invasive breast cancer with and without DCIS component. Radiology 2017;284:645-655 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017161449
  13. Houssami N, Turner R, Morrow M. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: meta-analysis of surgical outcomes. Ann Surg 2013;257:249-255 https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827a8d17
  14. Fortune-Greeley AK, Wheeler SB, Meyer AM, Reeder-Hayes KE, Biddle AK, Muss HB, et al. Preoperative breast MRI and surgical outcomes in elderly women with invasive ductal and lobular carcinoma: a population-based study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2014;143:203-212 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2787-4
  15. McGhan LJ, Wasif N, Gray RJ, Giurescu ME, Pizzitola VJ, Lorans R, et al. Use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging for invasive lobular cancer: good, better, but maybe not the best? Ann Surg Oncol 2010;17 Suppl 3:255-262 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1266-y
  16. Mann RM, Loo CE, Wobbes T, Bult P, Barentsz JO, Gilhuijs KG, et al. The impact of preoperative breast MRI on the re-excision rate in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010;119:415-422 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-009-0616-6
  17. Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B, Decker T, Federico M, Gilbert FJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 2010;46:1296-1316 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.015
  18. National Comprehensive Cancer Network.® Breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Version 1.2015. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Plymouth Meeting: NCCN, 2015
  19. Truin W, Roumen RM, Siesling S, van der Heiden-van der Loo M, Duijm LE, Tjan-Heijnen VC, et al. Patients with invasive lobular breast cancer are less likely to undergo breast-conserving surgery: a population based study in the Netherlands. Ann Surg Oncol 2015;22:1471-1478 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4175-7
  20. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, Allred DC, Hagerty KL, Badve S, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:2784-2795 https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.25.6529
  21. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, 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 2007;131:18-43 https://doi.org/10.5858/2007-131-18-ASOCCO
  22. Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, Houssami N, Chavez-MacGregor M, Harris JR, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology-American Society of Clinical Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol 2016;23:3801-3810 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5449-z
  23. D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, Morris EA. ACR BI-RADS atlas: breast imaging reporting and data system, 5th ed. Reston: American College of Radiology, 2013
  24. Lai HW, Huang RH, Wu YT, Chen CJ, Chen ST, Lin YJ, et al. Clinicopathologic factors related to surgical margin involvement, reoperation, and residual cancer in primary operable breast cancer-An analysis of 2050 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 2018;44:1725-1735 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.07.056
  25. Singletary SE. Surgical margins in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy. Am J Surg 2002;184:383-393 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9610(02)01012-7
  26. Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004;233:830-849 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2333031484
  27. Park SY, Kang DK, Kim TH. Does background parenchymal enhancement on MRI affect the rate of positive resection margin in breast cancer patients? Br J Radiol 2015;88:20140638
  28. Jang M, Kim SM, Yun BL, Kim SW, Kang EY, Park SY, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging factors predicting re-excision in breast cancer patients having undergone conserving therapy. J Korean Soc Magn Reson Med 2014;18:133-143 https://doi.org/10.13104/jksmrm.2014.18.2.133
  29. Tozaki M, Fukuda K. High-spatial-resolution MRI of nonmasslike breast lesions: interpretation model based on BIRADS MRI descriptors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:330-337 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.0998
  30. Liberman L, Morris EA, Lee MJ, Kaplan JB, LaTrenta LR, Menell JH, et al. Breast lesions detected on MR imaging: features and positive predictive value. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:171-178 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.179.1.1790171
  31. Yamada T, Mori N, Watanabe M, Kimijima I, Okumoto T, Seiji K, et al. Radiologic-pathologic correlation of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiographics 2010;30:1183-1198 https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.305095073
  32. Kurniawan ED, Wong MH, Windle I, Rose A, Mou A, Buchanan M, et al. Predictors of surgical margin status in breast-conserving surgery within a breast screening program. Ann Surg Oncol 2008;15:2542-2549 https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0054-4
  33. Zhou J, Li G, Sheng F, Qiao P, Zhang H, Xing X. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of residual tumors in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: surgical implications. Acta Radiol 2016;57:529-537 https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185115597263
  34. Qayyum A, Birdwell RL, Daniel BL, Nowels KW, Jeffrey SS, Agoston TA, et al. MR imaging features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: histopathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:1227-1232 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.178.5.1781227
  35. Shin SU, Cho N, Lee HB, Kim SY, Yi A, Kim SY, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery for breast cancer: preoperative MRI features associated with local recurrence. Radiology 2018;289:30-38 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2018172888
  36. Mann RM, Bult P, van Laarhoven HW, Span PN, Schlooz M, Veltman J, et al. Breast cancer size estimation with MRI in BRCA mutation carriers and other high risk patients. Eur J Radiol 2013;82:1416-1422 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.03.003
  37. Spick C, Baltzer PA. Diagnostic utility of second-look US for breast lesions identified at MR imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology 2014;273:401-409 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14140474
  38. Raje D, Bollard R, Wilson A. Invasive lobular cancer of the breast-Is breast conservation surgery a good option? Breast J 2006;12:574-575 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2006.00351.x
  39. Hussien M, Lioe TF, Finnegan J, Spence RA. Surgical treatment for invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast 2003;12:23-35 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9776(02)00182-0
  40. Wanis ML, Wong JA, Rodriguez S, Wong JM, Jabo B, Ashok A, et al. Rate of re-excision after breast-conserving surgery for invasive lobular carcinoma. Am Surg 2013;79:1119-1122 https://doi.org/10.1177/000313481307901034
  41. Lunkiewicz M, Forte S, Freiwald B, Singer G, Leo C, Kubik-Huch RA. Interobserver variability and likelihood of malignancy for fifth edition BI-RADS MRI descriptors in non-mass breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2020;30:77-86 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06312-7
  42. Cen D, Hu W, Wang X, Wu X. Re: identification of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging features associated with positive resection margins in breast cancer? Korean J Radiol 2019;20:999-1000 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2019.0044