平均明显推进器磁共振成像:浸润性乳腺导管癌中肿瘤与基质比率的定量评估。

IF 5.6 Q1 ONCOLOGY Radiology. Imaging cancer Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1148/rycan.230165
Xiang Zhang, Ya Qiu, Wei Jiang, Zehong Yang, Mengzhu Wang, Qin Li, Yeqing Liu, Xu Yan, Guang Yang, Jun Shen
{"title":"平均明显推进器磁共振成像:浸润性乳腺导管癌中肿瘤与基质比率的定量评估。","authors":"Xiang Zhang, Ya Qiu, Wei Jiang, Zehong Yang, Mengzhu Wang, Qin Li, Yeqing Liu, Xu Yan, Guang Yang, Jun Shen","doi":"10.1148/rycan.230165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To determine whether metrics from mean apparent propagator (MAP) MRI perform better than apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in assessing the tumor-stroma ratio (TSR) status in breast carcinoma. Materials and Methods From August 2021 to October 2022, 271 participants were prospectively enrolled (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05159323) and underwent breast diffusion spectral imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging. MAP MRI metrics and ADC were derived from the diffusion MRI data. All participants were divided into high-TSR (stromal component < 50%) and low-TSR (stromal component ≥ 50%) groups based on pathologic examination. Clinicopathologic characteristics were collected, and MRI findings were assessed. Logistic regression was used to determine the independent variables for distinguishing TSR status. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were compared between the MAP MRI metrics, either alone or combined with clinicopathologic characteristics, and ADC, using the DeLong and McNemar test. Results A total of 181 female participants (mean age, 49 years ± 10 [SD]) were included. All diffusion MRI metrics differed between the high-TSR and low-TSR groups (<i>P</i> < .001 to <i>P</i> = .01). Radial non-Gaussianity from MAP MRI and lymphovascular invasion were significant independent variables for discriminating the two groups, with a higher AUC (0.81 [95% CI: 0.74, 0.87] vs 0.61 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.68], <i>P</i> < .001) and accuracy (138 of 181 [76%] vs 106 of 181 [59%], <i>P</i> < .001) than that of the ADC. Conclusion MAP MRI may serve as a better approach than conventional diffusion-weighted imaging in evaluating the TSR of breast carcinoma. <b>Keywords:</b> MR Diffusion-weighted Imaging, MR Imaging, Breast, Oncology ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05159323 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> © RSNA, 2024.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287226/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mean Apparent Propagator MRI: Quantitative Assessment of Tumor-Stroma Ratio in Invasive Ductal Breast Carcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Xiang Zhang, Ya Qiu, Wei Jiang, Zehong Yang, Mengzhu Wang, Qin Li, Yeqing Liu, Xu Yan, Guang Yang, Jun Shen\",\"doi\":\"10.1148/rycan.230165\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Purpose To determine whether metrics from mean apparent propagator (MAP) MRI perform better than apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in assessing the tumor-stroma ratio (TSR) status in breast carcinoma. Materials and Methods From August 2021 to October 2022, 271 participants were prospectively enrolled (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05159323) and underwent breast diffusion spectral imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging. MAP MRI metrics and ADC were derived from the diffusion MRI data. All participants were divided into high-TSR (stromal component < 50%) and low-TSR (stromal component ≥ 50%) groups based on pathologic examination. Clinicopathologic characteristics were collected, and MRI findings were assessed. Logistic regression was used to determine the independent variables for distinguishing TSR status. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were compared between the MAP MRI metrics, either alone or combined with clinicopathologic characteristics, and ADC, using the DeLong and McNemar test. Results A total of 181 female participants (mean age, 49 years ± 10 [SD]) were included. All diffusion MRI metrics differed between the high-TSR and low-TSR groups (<i>P</i> < .001 to <i>P</i> = .01). Radial non-Gaussianity from MAP MRI and lymphovascular invasion were significant independent variables for discriminating the two groups, with a higher AUC (0.81 [95% CI: 0.74, 0.87] vs 0.61 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.68], <i>P</i> < .001) and accuracy (138 of 181 [76%] vs 106 of 181 [59%], <i>P</i> < .001) than that of the ADC. Conclusion MAP MRI may serve as a better approach than conventional diffusion-weighted imaging in evaluating the TSR of breast carcinoma. <b>Keywords:</b> MR Diffusion-weighted Imaging, MR Imaging, Breast, Oncology ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05159323 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> © RSNA, 2024.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiology. Imaging cancer\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11287226/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiology. Imaging cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1148/rycan.230165\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/rycan.230165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 确定平均表观传播者(MAP)磁共振成像指标在评估乳腺癌的肿瘤-基质比(TSR)状态时是否比表观弥散系数(ADC)值表现更好。材料与方法 2021 年 8 月至 2022 年 10 月,271 名参与者前瞻性入组(ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT05159323)并接受了乳腺弥散频谱成像和弥散加权成像。MAP MRI 指标和 ADC 均来自弥散 MRI 数据。根据病理检查结果将所有参与者分为高TSR组(基质成分<50%)和低TSR组(基质成分≥50%)。收集临床病理特征,评估核磁共振成像结果。采用逻辑回归确定区分 TSR 状态的自变量。使用 DeLong 和 McNemar 检验比较了 MAP MRI 指标(单独或结合临床病理特征)与 ADC 之间的接收器操作特征曲线下面积(AUC)、灵敏度、特异性和准确性。结果 共纳入了 181 名女性参与者(平均年龄为 49 岁 ± 10 [SD])。高TSR组和低TSR组的所有弥散MRI指标均有差异(P < .001 至 P = .01)。与 ADC 相比,MAP MRI 的径向非高斯性(0.81 [95% CI: 0.74, 0.87] vs 0.61 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.68],P < .001)和准确性(181 例中的 138 例 [76%] vs 181 例中的 106 例 [59%],P < .001)更高。结论 在评估乳腺癌的 TSR 时,MAP MRI 可能是比传统扩散加权成像更好的方法。关键词磁共振弥散加权成像 磁共振成像 乳腺癌 肿瘤学 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:本文有补充材料。© RSNA, 2024.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mean Apparent Propagator MRI: Quantitative Assessment of Tumor-Stroma Ratio in Invasive Ductal Breast Carcinoma.

Purpose To determine whether metrics from mean apparent propagator (MAP) MRI perform better than apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in assessing the tumor-stroma ratio (TSR) status in breast carcinoma. Materials and Methods From August 2021 to October 2022, 271 participants were prospectively enrolled (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05159323) and underwent breast diffusion spectral imaging and diffusion-weighted imaging. MAP MRI metrics and ADC were derived from the diffusion MRI data. All participants were divided into high-TSR (stromal component < 50%) and low-TSR (stromal component ≥ 50%) groups based on pathologic examination. Clinicopathologic characteristics were collected, and MRI findings were assessed. Logistic regression was used to determine the independent variables for distinguishing TSR status. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were compared between the MAP MRI metrics, either alone or combined with clinicopathologic characteristics, and ADC, using the DeLong and McNemar test. Results A total of 181 female participants (mean age, 49 years ± 10 [SD]) were included. All diffusion MRI metrics differed between the high-TSR and low-TSR groups (P < .001 to P = .01). Radial non-Gaussianity from MAP MRI and lymphovascular invasion were significant independent variables for discriminating the two groups, with a higher AUC (0.81 [95% CI: 0.74, 0.87] vs 0.61 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.68], P < .001) and accuracy (138 of 181 [76%] vs 106 of 181 [59%], P < .001) than that of the ADC. Conclusion MAP MRI may serve as a better approach than conventional diffusion-weighted imaging in evaluating the TSR of breast carcinoma. Keywords: MR Diffusion-weighted Imaging, MR Imaging, Breast, Oncology ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05159323 Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2024.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
2.30%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Multifrequency MR Elastography for Tumor Stiffness Outperforms Conventional Imaging and Clinical Variables in Determining Lymphovascular Space Invasion in Endometrial Cancer. Assessing the Value of 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT in Gastric Mucinous Adenocarcinoma or Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma. External Validation of a Previously Developed Deep Learning-based Prostate Lesion Detection Algorithm on Paired External and In-House Biparametric MRI Scans. Mathematical 3D Liver Model for Surgical versus Ablative Therapy Treatment Planning for Colorectal Liver Metastases: Recommendations from the COLLISION and COLDFIRE Trial Expert Panels. A New Acquisition Protocol for Optimized Dynamic Susceptibility Perfusion Imaging of Brain Tumors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1