Prediction of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer using a combination of contrast‐enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging

• Published in: Cancer medicine (Malden, MA) MA), 2023-01, Vol.12 (2), p.1389-1398
• Main Authors: Han, Xue, Yang, Huajing, Jin, Shiyang, Sun, Yunfeng, Zhang, Hongxia, Shan, Ming, Cheng, Wen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Angiogenesis; Biopsy; Breast cancer; Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Breast Neoplasms - drug therapy; Breast Neoplasms - pathology; Cancer therapies; Catheters; Chemotherapy; Contrast Media; contrast‐enhanced; dynamic contrast‐enhanced MRI; Female; Humans; Lumpectomy; Lymphatic system; Magnetic resonance imaging; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods; Mastectomy; Medical prognosis; Middle Aged; Multivariate analysis; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Neoadjuvant Therapy - methods; Patients; Regression analysis; Surgery; Treatment Outcome; Tumors; Ultrasonic imaging; Ultrasound; ultrasound breast cancer; Womens health
• ISSN: 2045-7634; 2045-7634
• DOI: 10.1002/cam4.5019

This study aimed to evaluate the value of dynamic contrast‐enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) combined with dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE‐MRI) in predicting pathological complete response (pCR) in patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Fifty‐seven female patients with breast cancer (mean age, 50.46 years; range, 32–66 years) scheduled for NAC were recruited. CEUS and DCE‐MRI were performed before and after NAC. Imaging features and their changes were compared with postoperative pathological results. After the clinical differences were balanced using propensity score matching, univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to derive the characteristics independently associated with pCR. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to assess diagnostic performance. After six to eight cycles of NAC, 24 (42.1%) patients achieved pCR, while 33 (57.9%) did not. Multivariate analysis showed that enhancement order on CEUS and DCE‐MRI before NAC, reduction in diameter and enhancement shape on CEUS, maximum diameter on DCE‐MRI, and the type of progressive dynamic contrast enhancement after NAC were independently associated with pCR after NAC. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for CEUS+DCE‐MRI was 0.911 (95% confidence interval, 0.826–0.997), and the specificity and positive predictive values were 87.0% and 87.5%. CEUS and DCE‐MRI have the potential for assessing the pathological response to NAC in patients with breast cancer; their combination showed the best diagnostic performance. CEUS+DCE‐MRI has proved beneficial for comprehensive assessment and personalizing treatment strategies for patients with breast cancer. Our study evaluated the ability of contrast‐enhanced ultrasound and dynamic contrast‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to predict pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer.