机构地区:[1]山东省肿瘤医院放射科 [2]山东省肿瘤医院济南大学山东省医学科学院医学与生命科学学院,济南 250117 [3]山东省肿瘤医院内六科 [4]山东省肿瘤医院病理科
出 处:《中华肿瘤杂志》2014年第8期606-611,共6页Chinese Journal of Oncology
摘 要:目的分析3.0T磁共振成像(3.0T-MRI)表观扩散系数(ADC)与乳腺浸润性导管癌组织学分级和分子生物学特征的相关性。方法收集2010年2月至2013年2月间经手术病理证实的125例乳腺浸润性导管癌患者,患者术前均行常规3.0T-MRI和扩散加权成像(DWI)检查,扩散敏感系数(b值)为0和800s/mm^2,在ADC图上,于病灶最大层面和(或)其上下两层面选取感兴趣区(ROI)测量ADC值。分析其与病理分级和生物因子表达问的相关性。结果I、Ⅱ、Ⅲ级乳腺浸润性导管癌的ADC值分别为(1.152±0.072)×10^-3、(1.102±0.101)×10^-3和(1.035±0.107)×10^-3mm^2/s,差异有统计学意义(P=0.003)。Ⅲ级乳腺浸润性导管癌的ADC值与I、Ⅱ级乳腺浸润性导管癌的ADC值间差异均有统计学意义(P=0.034,P=0.006),I级乳腺浸润性导管癌的ADC值与Ⅱ级乳腺浸润性导管癌的ADC值间差异无统计学意义(P=0.741)。乳腺浸润性导管癌病理分级与ADC值呈负相关(r=-0.342,P〈0.001)。125例乳腺浸润性导管癌患者中,雌激素受体(ER)阳性组和阴性组的ADC值分别为(1.060±0.089)×10^-3和(1.130±0.115)×10^-3mm^2/s(P〈0.001),孕激素受体(PR)阳性组和阴性组的ADC值分别为(1.055±O.096)×10^-3mm^2/s和(1.121±0.106)×10^-3mm^2/s(P〈0.001),Ki-67阳性组和阴性组的ADC值分别为(1.063±0.101)x10^-3mm^2/s和(1.153±0.090)×10^-3mm^2/s(P〈0.001)。乳腺浸润性导管癌的ADC值与ER、PR和Ki-67的表达呈负相关(r分别为-0.311、-0.317、-0.414,均P〈0.001)。结论ADC值与乳腺浸润性导管癌组织学分级和ER、PR、Ki-67的表达存在一定相关性。Objective To study the correlation between the MRI apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and histological grade and molecular biology of breast invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Methods This retrospective study included 125 patients with IDC verified by pathology from February 2010 to February 2013. Conventional MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) examination were performed using a 3.0T scanner with diffusion factor of 0 and 800 s/mm^2. The region of interest (ROI) was drawn on the largest lesion and/or its two adjacent shces. The ADC value of the whole tumor was calculated as the mean ADC value. The correlation between mean ADCs and histological grade and biological factors was analyzed. Results The mean ADC of pathological grade I , 11 and m IDC was (1. 152 ± 0.072) × 10^-3 mm^2/s, ( 1. 102 ± 0. 101 ) × 10^-3 mm^2/s, and ( 1. 035 ± 0. 107) × 10^-3 mm^2/s, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference among them (P = 0. 003 ). Statistically a significant difference was observed between gradeⅢ and I (P = 0.034) , grade Ⅲ and Ⅱ (P = 0. 006 ) , but not between grade I and Ⅱ (P = 0.741 ). A significant correlation was observed between ADC value and pathological grade (r = - 0. 342 ,P 〈0. 001 ). The median ADC values were significantly higher in the ER-negative than in the ER- positive eases [ ( 1. 130 ± 0.115) × 10^-3 mm^2/s vs. ( 1. 060 ± 0. 089) ×10^-3 mm^2/s, p 〈 0.001 ) ], in R-negative than in PR-positive cases [ ( 1. 121 ± 0. 106) × 10^-3mm^2/s vs. ( 1. 055 ±0. 096) × 10^-3mm^2/s, P 〈 0.001 ) ], and in Ki-67-negative than in Ki-67-positive cases [ (1. 153 ± 0.090) ×10^-3mm^2/s vs. (1. 063 ±0. 101 ) × 10^-3mm^2/s, p 〈 0. 001 ]. A statistically significant correlation was observed between ADC value and expressions of ER, PR, and Ki-67 (r = - 0.311, r = - 0.317, r = - 0. 414, P 〈 0.001). Conclusion ADC value of breast invasive ductal carcinoma is correlated with hist
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...