乳腺浸润性导管癌不同分子分型及病理组织学分级间常规超声征像的差异

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (1337 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To explore the difference in conventional ultrasonographic features of breast invasive ductal carcinoma between different molecular subtypes and histopathological grades. Methods The complete clinical data on patients hospitalized due to breast mass bumps and eventually diagnosed with breast invasive ductal carcinoma was collected before the typical preoperative ultrasound features and postoperative pathological data were retrospectively analyzed. The difference and correlations between different molecular subtypes and histopathological grades were analyzed. Results (1) There was significant difference in the ultrasonic signs of molecular subtype lesions between the five groups (P<0.05). Most of the ultrasonic signs of the three-negative lesions showed uniform echo of the tumor (47.2%, 17/36), and enhanced echo behind the lesions (58.3%, 21/36).Echo attenuation (5.6%, 2/36)and microcalcification (27.8%, 10/36)were uncommon.Most of the ultrasonographic signs of HER-2 positive (HR positive) lesions were microcalcification (77.8%, 35/45) with posterior echo attenuation (48.9%, 22/45).Ultrasonographic signs of Luminal A type lesions showed a lack of blood supply among most of the patients (62.2%, 46/74).(2) The ultrasonographic signs of lesions of different histological grades were significantly different (P<0.05).Most of the lesions in the moderately and highly differentiated group showed edge spiculation signs (70.0%, 133/190), hyperechoic halo (60.5%, 115/190), and posterior echo attenuation (42.1%, 80/190).The dominating ultrasonographic manifestation of lesions in the poorly-differentiated group was abundant blood supply (84.3%, 43/51). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the distribution of blood supply and the echo characteristics behind the tumors were independent risk factors for identifying IDC lesions via ultrasound imaging in the poorly-differentiated group (P<0.05). Conclusions Ultrasound examination of breast invasive ductal carcinoma can facilitate molecular classification and histological grading, and provide imaging data for personalized treatment and early prediction of therapeutic effect in patients with breast cancer.

Key words： IDC ultrasonography molecular classification histological classification

Received: 14 February 2021

ZTFLH:

R737.9

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	LIU Ke
	LIU Ying
	TU Yingxuan
	LIU Xin
	WANG Yuanyuan
	LI Hao

Cite this article:

LIU Ke,LIU Ying,TU Yingxuan等. Routine ultrasonographic features, molecular subtypes and histological classification of breast invasive ductal carcinoma[J]. Med. J. Chin. Peop. Armed Poli. Forc., 2021, 32(7): 607-611.

URL:

http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/ OR http://journal08.magtechjournal.com/Jwk_wjyx/EN/Y2021/V32/I7/607

[1]	Bray F,Ferlay J,Soerjomataram I,et al.Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J].CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians,2018,68(6):394-424.
[2]	赖兴建,朱庆莉,姜玉新,等.乳腺病变超声乳腺影像报告和数据系统(BI- RADS)诊断一致性的评估[J].中华超声影像学杂志,2010,19(8):701-704.
[3]	李健斌,江泽飞.2019年CSCO BC指南更新要点解读[J].中国肿瘤外科杂志,2019,11(3):155-160.
[4]	高微波,朱海涛,孙应实.乳腺癌影像基因组学研究现状与进展[J].中华放射学杂志,2017,51(12):990-992.
[5]	Çelebi F, Pilanc K N, Ordu Ç, et al. The role of ultrasonographic findings to predict molecular subtype, histologic grade, and hormone receptor status of breast cancer[J]. Diagn Interv Radiol, 2015,21(6):448-453.
[6]	Xu J, Li F, Chang F. Correlation of the ultrasound imaging of breast cancer and the expression of molecular biological indexes[J]. Pak J Pharm Sci, 2017,30(4):1425-1430.
[7]	Shokouh T Z, Ezatollah A, Barand P. Interrelationships Between Ki67, HER2/neu, p53, ER, and PR status and their associations with tumor grade and lymph node involvement in breast carcinoma subtypes: retrospective-observational analytical study[J]. Medicine (Baltimore),2015,94(32):1359-1364.
[8]	Aho M, Irshad A, Ackerman S J, et al. Correlation of sonographic features of invasive ductal mammary carcinoma with age, tumor grade, and hormone-receptor status[J]. J Clin Ultrasound,2013,41(1):10-17.
[9]	Öztürk M, Polat A V, Süllü Y, et al. Background parenchymal enhancement and fibroglandular tissue proportion on breast MRI: correlation with hormone receptor expression and molecular subtypes of breast cancer[J]. J Breast Health,2017,13(1):27-33.
[10]	Viale G, Morganti S, Ferraro E, et al. What therapies are on the horizon for HER2 positive breast cancer[J]. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther,2019,19(9):811-822.
[11]	Pais A, Biton I E, Margalit R, et al. Characterization of estrogen-receptor-targeted contrast agents in solution, breast cancer cells, and tumors in vivo[J]. Magn Reson Med,2013,70(1):193-206.
[12]	Tafreshi N K, Kumar V, Morse D L,et al. Molecular and functional imaging of breast cancer. cancer control[J]. Pak J Pharm Sci,2010,17(3):143-155.
[13]	毛羡仪,梁伟翔,蒋殿虎, 等.乳腺癌高回声晕超声特征与ER、PR表达水平的相关性分析[J].医学影像学杂志,2020,30(6):1001-1004.
[14]	Sinha A, Gill S S. Correlative study of cytological features in grading of invasive breast carcinoma[J]. J Cytol,2018,35(3):149-152.
[15]	Ács B, Zámbó V, Vízkeleti L, et al. Ki-67 as a controversial predictive and prognostic marker in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J].Diagn Pathol,2017,12(1):20-21.
[16]	Kuerer H M, Buzdar A U, Mittendorf E A, et al. Biologic and immunologic effects of preoperative trastuzumab for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast[J]. Cancer, 2011,117(1):39-47.