Correlation between conductivity and prognostic factors in invasive breast cancer using magnetic resonance electric properties tomography (MREPT)
To investigate the correlation between conductivity and prognostic factors of invasive breast cancer using magnetic resonance electric properties tomography (MREPT).
This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, and verbal informed consent was obtained prior to breast MRI. This study included 65 women with surgically confirmed invasive breast cancers measuring 1 cm or larger on T2-weighted fast spin echo (FSE). Phase-based MREPT and the coil combination technique were used to reconstruct conductivity. Simple and multiple linear regression analysis were used to find an independent factor associated with conductivity.
In total tumours, tumours with HER-2 overexpression showed lower conductivity than those without, and HER-2 overexpression was independently associated with conductivity. In 37 tumours 2 cm or larger, tumours with high mitosis or PR positivity showed higher conductivity than those without, and high mitosis and PR positivity were independently associated with conductivity. In 28 tumours 1–2 cm in size, there were no differences in conductivity according to the prognostic factors.
Conductivity values measured using MREPT are associated with the HER-2 overexpression status, and may provide information about mitosis and the PR status of invasive breast cancers 2 cm or larger.
• In all tumours, HER-2 overexpression was independently associated with conductivity.
• In tumours ≥ 2 cm, high mitosis and PR positivity were associated with conductivity.
• Conductivity is associated with the HER-2 overexpression status of invasive breast cancers.
KeywordsElectric conductivity Magnetic resonance imaging Breast cancer HER-2 Mitosis
- 2.Hancu I, Roberts JC, Bulumulla S, Lee SK (2014) On conductivity, permittivity, apparent diffusion coefficient, and their usefulness as cancer markers at MRI frequencies. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine e-published 19 Jun 2014Google Scholar
- 4.Katscher U, Abe H, Ivancevic M, Djamshidi K, Karkowski P, Newstead G (2013) Towards the investigation of breast tumor malignancy via electric conductivity measurement ISMRM, pp 4180Google Scholar
- 5.Shin JW, Kim S-Y, Kim MJ, Kim D-H (2015) Initial study on in-vivo conductivity mapping of breast cancer using MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 42:371–378Google Scholar
- 6.Katscher U, Kim D-H, Seo JK (2013) Recent progress and future challenges in MR electric properties tomography. Computational and mathematical methods in medicine 2013Google Scholar
- 13.Balidemaj E, Lier AL, Crezee H, Nederveen AJ, Stalpers LJ, Berg CA (2014) Feasibility of Electric Property Tomography of pelvic tumors at 3T. Magnetic Resonance in Medicine e-published 28 April 2014Google Scholar
- 16.Koo JS, Jung W, Shin E et al (2009) Impact of grade, hormone receptor, and HER-2 status in women with breast cancer on response to specific chemotherapeutic agents by in vitro adenosine triphosphate-based chemotherapy response assay. J Korean Med Sci 24:1150–1157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 17.Goldhirsch A, Wood W, Coates A, Gelber R, Thürlimann B, Senn H-J (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 2011. Ann Oncol 22:1736–1747CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 20.Sha L, Ward ER, Stroy B (2002) A review of dielectric properties of normal and malignant breast tissue SoutheastCon, 2002. Proc IEEE 457–462Google Scholar
- 28.Elias SG, Adams A, Wisner DJ et al (2014) Imaging features of HER2 overexpression in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionGoogle Scholar
- 39.Locker A, Birrell K, Bell J et al (1992) Ki67 immunoreactivity in breast carcinoma: relationships to prognostic variables and short term survival. Eur J Surg Oncol J Eur Soc Surg Oncol Br Assoc Surg Oncol 18:224–229Google Scholar