Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Stiffness of tumours measured by shear-wave elastography correlated with subtypes of breast cancer

  • Breast
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the correlation between stiffness values obtained by shear-wave elastography (SWE) and breast cancer subtypes.

Methods

This was an institutional review board-approved retrospective study with a waiver of informed consent. The stiffness of 337 invasive breast cancers in 337 women was evaluated by SWE and mean stiffness values (kPa) and qualitative colour scores (1–5) of tumours were obtained. The results were analysed according to BI-RADS category, tumour size, grade and tumour subtype (triple-negative [TN], human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2]-positive, and oestrogen receptor [ER]-positive) using a multiple linear regression analysis.

Results

The mean stiffness values and colour scores were: 146.8 kPa ± 57.0 and 4.1 ± 1.1; 165.8 kPa ± 48.5 and 4.6 ± 0.7 for TN tumours (n = 64), 160.3 kPa ± 56.2 and 4.3 ± 1.0 for HER2-positive tumours (n = 55) and 136.9 kPa ± 57.2 and 4.0 ± 1.1 for ER-positive tumours (n = 218; P < 0.0001). All three breast cancers classified as BI-RADS category 3 on B-mode ultrasound were TN subtype. A multiple linear regression analysis revealed that tumour size, histological grade and tumour subtype were independent factors that influenced the stiffness values.

Conclusion

High stiffness values correlated with aggressive subtypes of breast cancer.

Key points

• Shear-wave elastography is increasingly used to measure the stiffness of breast tumours.

• Triple-negative and HER2-positive tumours showed greater stiffness than ER-positive tumours.

• All breast cancers classified as BI-RADS 3 on B-mode ultrasound were triple-negative subtype.

• Tumour size, histological grade and subtype were independent factors influencing SWE stiffness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cosgrove DO, Berg WA, Doré CJ et al (2012) Shear wave elastography for breast masses is highly reproducible. Eur Radiol 22:1023–1032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Evans A, Whelehan P, Thomson K et al (2010) Quantitative shear wave ultrasound elastography: initial experience in solid breast masses. Breast Cancer Res 12:R104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chang JM, Moon WK, Cho N et al (2011) Clinical application of shear wave elastography (SWE) in the diagnosis of benign and malignant breast diseases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 129:89–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Berg WA, Cosgrove DO, Doré CJ et al (2012) Shear-wave elastography improves the specificity of breast US: the BE1 multinational study of 939 masses. Radiology 262:435–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Evans A, Whelehan P, Thomson K et al (2012) Invasive breast cancer: relationship between shear-wave elastographic findings and histologic prognostic factors. Radiology 263:673–677

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406:747–752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS et al (2011) Strategies for subtypes-dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer. Ann Oncol 22:1736–1747

    Google Scholar 

  8. Longo DL (2012) Tumor heterogeneity and personalized medicine. N Engl J Med 366:956–957

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Desmedt C, Haibe-Kains B, Wirapati P et al (2008) Biological processes associated with breast cancer clinical outcome depend on the molecular subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 14:5158–5165

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sánchez-Muñoz A, García-Tapiador AM, Martinez-Ortega E et al (2008) Tumour molecular subtyping according to hormone receptors and HER2 status defines different pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 10:646–653

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nicholson RI, Johnston SR (2005) Endocrine therapy: current benefits and limitations. Breast Cancer Res Treat 93:S3–S10

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Tokunaga E, Oki E, Nishida K et al (2006) Trastuzumab and breast cancer: developments and current status. Int J Clin Oncol 11:199–208

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Bae MS, Han W, Koo HR et al (2011) Characteristics of breast cancers detected by ultrasound screening in women with negative mammograms. Cancer Sci 102:1862–1867

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Uematsu T, Kasami M, Yuen S (2009) Triple-negative breast cancer: correlation between MR imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology 250:638–647

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang Y, Ikeda DM, Narasimhan B et al (2008) Estrogen receptor–negative invasive breast cancer: imaging features of tumors with and without human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 overexpression. Radiology 246:367–375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Au-Yong IT, Evans AJ, Taneja S et al (2009) Sonographic correlations with the new molecular classification of invasive breast cancer. Eur Radiol 19:2342–2348

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Basu S, Chen W, Tchou J et al (2008) Comparison of triple-negative and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma using quantitative fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose/positron emission tomography imaging parameters: a potentially useful method for disease characterization. Cancer 112:995–1000

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Dogan BE, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Gilcrease M, Dryden MJ, Yang WT (2010) Multimodality imaging of triple receptor-negative tumors with mammography, ultrasound, and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1160–1166

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Youk JH, Gweon HM, Son EJ, Kim JA, Jeong J (2013) Shear-wave elastography of invasive breast cancer: correlation between quantitative mean elasticity value and immunohistochemical profile. Breast Cancer Res Treat 138:119–126

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee SH, Chang JM, Kim WH et al (2012) Differentiation of benign from malignant solid breast masses: comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional shear-wave elastography. Eur Radiol 23:1015–1026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gweon HM, Youk JH, Son EJ, Kim JA (2012) Visually assessed colour overlay features in shear-wave elastography for breast masses: quantification and diagnostic performance. Eur Radiol 23:658–663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schrading S, Kuhl CK (2008) Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology 246:58–70

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, Berg WA et al (2003) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS: Mammography, 4th edn. American College of Radiology, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  24. Elston CW, Ellis IO (1991) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 19:403–410

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M et al (2010) 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 28:2784–2795

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mendelson EB, Baum JK, Berg WA, Merritt CRB, Rubin E (2003) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS: Ultrasound, 1st edn. American College of Radiology, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  27. Levental KR, Yu H, Kass L et al (2009) Matrix crosslinking forces tumor progression by enhancing integrin signaling. Cell 139:891–906

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Butcher DT, Alliston T, Weaver VM (2009) A tense situation: forcing tumour progression. Nat Rev Cancer 9:108–122

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Baker EL, Lu J, Yu D, Bonnecaze RT, Zaman MH (2010) Cancer cell stiffness: integrated roles of three-dimensional matrix stiffness and transforming potential. Biophys J 99:2048–2057

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Jugé L, Doan BT, Seguin J et al (2012) Colon tumor growth and antivascular treatment in mice: complementary assessment with MR elastography and diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 264:436–444

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ferraioli G, Tinelli C, Dal Bello B et al (2012) Accuracy of real-time shear wave elastography for assessing liver fibrosis in chronic hepatitis C: a pilot study. Hepatology 56:2125–2133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Magri F, Chytiris S, Capelli V et al (2012) Shear wave elastography in the diagnosis of thyroid nodules: feasibility in the case of coexistent chronic autoimmune Hashimoto’s thyroiditis. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 76:137–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Tamaki K, Ishida T, Miyashita M et al (2011) Correlation between mammographic findings and corresponding histopathology: potential predictors for biological characteristics of breast diseases. Cancer Sci 102:2179–2185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Lamb PM, Perry NM, Vinnicombe SJ, Wells CA (2000) Correlation between ultrasound characteristics, mammographic findings and histological grade in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol 55:40–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Samani A, Bishop J, Luginbuhl C, Plewes DB (2003) Measuring the elastic modulus of ex vivo small tissue samples. Phys Med Biol 48:2183–2198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research was supported by the Converging Research Center Program through the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2012K001499), the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean government (MEST) (no. 2012A01010846), and the SNUH Research Fund (03-2012-0400).

The SWE data of 61 of 337 of our subjects have been used and published in our previous paper [3].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Woo Kyung Moon.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chang, J.M., Park, I.A., Lee, S.H. et al. Stiffness of tumours measured by shear-wave elastography correlated with subtypes of breast cancer. Eur Radiol 23, 2450–2458 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2866-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-013-2866-2

Keywords

Navigation