| Citation: |
QIN Aiping, YANG Yan, QI Tingyue. Ultrasonic characteristics and prognostic analysis of different molecular subtypes of invasive breast cancer[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2023, 27(24): 26-29, 36. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.20232160
|
To compare the ultrasonographic characteristics of different molecular subtypes of invasive breast cancer and analyze their relationships with prognosis.
The clinical and ultrasonic data of 250 patients with invasive breast cancer were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into Luminal A type (n=53), Luminal B type (n=104), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression type (n=45) and triple-negative type (n=48) according to pathological findings. The ultrasonic characteristics as well as 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) among different molecular subtypes were compared, and the influencing factors the prognosis of invasive breast cancer were analyzed.
There were significant differences in ultrasonic imaging characteristics such as tumor growth direction, posterior echo and microcalcification between different molecular subtypes of invasive breast cancer (P < 0.05). Single factor analysis showed that molecular subtypes, tumor size, tumor staging, axillary lymph node metastasis and hyperechoic halo were associated with DFS and OS of patients with invasive breast cancer (P < 0.05). Multi-factor Cox regression analysis showed that molecular subtypes, tumor staging and hyperechoic halo were the independent influencing factors of DFS and OS in patients with invasive breast cancer (P < 0.05).
There are some differences in the ultrasonic characteristics and prognosis of different molecular types in patients with invasive breast cancer. Molecular subtypes, tumor staging and hyperechoic halo are the independent prognostic factors of invasive breast cancer.
| [1] |
SUNG H, FERLAY J, SIEGEL R L, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(3): 209-249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660
|
| [2] |
WAKS A G, WINER E P. Breast cancer treatment: a review[J]. JAMA, 2019, 321(3): 288-300. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.19323
|
| [3] |
ZHANG X Y, LI H, WANG C Y, et al. Evaluating the accuracy of breast cancer and molecular subtype diagnosis by ultrasound image deep learning model[J]. Front Oncol, 2021, 11: 623506. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.623506
|
| [4] |
SECHEL G, ROGOZEA L M, ROMAN N A, et al. Analysis of breast cancer subtypes and their correlations with receptors and ultrasound[J]. Revue Roumaine De Morphol Embryol, 2021, 62(1): 269-278. doi: 10.47162/RJME.62.1.28
|
| [5] |
HU Y, YANG Y P, GU R, et al. Does patient age affect the PPV3 of ACR BI-RADS Ultrasound categories 4 and 5 in the diagnostic setting[J]. Eur Radiol, 2018, 28(6): 2492-2498. doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5203-3
|
| [6] |
COATES A S, WINER E P, GOLDHIRSCH A, et al. Tailoring therapies: improving the management of early breast cancer: St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2015[J]. Ann Oncol, 2015, 26(8): 1533-1546. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv221
|
| [7] |
LAWSON B T, VINNICOMBE S, WHELEHAN P, et al. Associations between the ultrasound features of invasive breast cancer and breast cancer specific survival[J]. Clin Radiol, 2020, 75(11): 879. e13-879. e21.
|
| [8] |
WU T, LI J, WANG D M, et al. Identification of a correlation between the sonographic appearance and molecular subtype of invasive breast cancer: a review of 311 cases[J]. Clin Imaging, 2019, 53: 179-185. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.10.020
|
| [9] |
TSANG J, TSE G. Molecular classification of breast cancer[J]. Advances in Anatomic Pathol, 2020, 27(1): 27-35. doi: 10.1097/PAP.0000000000000232
|
| [10] |
XU J, LI F, CHANG F L. Correlation of the ultrasound imaging of breast cancer and the expression of molecular biological indexes[J]. Pak J Pharm Sci, 2017, 30(Suppl 4): 1425-1430.
|
| [11] |
ANDY E, TING S Y, BROOKE L, et al. The value of prognostic ultrasound features of breast cancer in different molecular subtypes with a focus on triple negative disease[J]. Breast Cancer Tokyo Jpn, 2021, 29(2): 1-6.
|
| [12] |
朱绘绘, 刘海珍, 郁春红, 等. 乳腺浸润性导管癌的超声特征及其与分子分型的相关性[J]. 宁夏医科大学学报, 2022, 44(1): 29-33.
|
| [13] |
曹春莉, 李军, 曹玉文, 等. 乳腺癌常规超声特征和剪切波弹性参数与其分子亚型的关系[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2021, 29(8): 801-806.
|
| [14] |
靳娟, 谭宏强, 何蕾蕾, 等. Ki67在非特殊型浸润性乳腺癌中的表达及临床病理意义[J]. 临床医学研究与实践, 2019, 4(29): 32-33.
|
| [15] |
HOWLADER N, CRONIN K A, KURIAN A W, et al. Differences in breast cancer survival by molecular subtypes in the United States[J]. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2018, 27(6): 619-626. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0627
|
| [16] |
FAN R, CHEN Y F, NECHUTA S, et al. Prediction models for breast cancer prognosis among Asian women[J]. Cancer, 2021, 127(11): 1758-1769. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33425
|
| [17] |
李双, 范红敏, 肖菲菲, 等. 不同分子分型及临床病理特征与乳腺癌术后患者预后的关系[J]. 临床与实验病理学杂志, 2016, 32(1): 39-44.
|
| [18] |
王欣月, 张树华. 乳腺实性结节超声声像图危险因素评分法临床应用价值探讨[J]. 中华肿瘤防治杂志, 2019, 26(6): 400-405.
|
| [19] |
ZHANG L, LI J, XIAO Y, et al. Identifying ultrasound and clinical features of breast cancer molecular subtypes by ensemble decision[J]. Sci Rep, 2015, 5: 11085. doi: 10.1038/srep11085
|
| [20] |
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, 1013.
|
| [21] |
郭丹, 兰梦, 范凤景, 等. 非特殊型浸润性乳腺癌的超声征象与病理分级的相关性[J]. 医学影像学杂志, 2018, 28(5): 766-770.
|
| [22] |
卓家伟, 何以敉, 张美恋, 等. 乳腺癌常规超声及剪切波弹性成像表现与淋巴结转移关系的研究[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2018, 27(8): 709-713.
|
© 2020 《实用临床医药杂志》编辑部
Address: 江苏省扬州市江阳中路136号，扬州大学江阳路北校区14号楼201室China Pos: 225009Tel: 0514-87978917、87978989、87978807
Supported by:
Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co., Ltd.
苏公网安备 32100302010246号
DownLoad: