Objectives To evaluate the diagnostic performance of post-neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) compared to contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) in predicting tumor response in breast cancer. Materials and methods Patients with breast cancer who were examined using 3.0-T MRI after NAT and underwent surgery between 2015 and 2018 were studied. Qualitative assessment of pathological complete response (pCR) and size of residual tumor following NAT were evaluated using CE-MRI and DW-MRI with b-values of 0 and 1000 s/mm2. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) cut-off for predicting pCR was estimated using Youden’s Index in lesions with residual high signal intensity. Agreement of residual tumor size at CE-MRI, DW-MRI, and pathology was compared. Results A total of 1062 patients (49.3 years ± 9.0) were evaluated. Sensitivity for predicting pCR did not show a significant difference between CE-MRI and DW-MRI (65.3% and 62.9%, p = 0.50). The HR+/HER2− subtype showed significantly lower positive predictive value and higher negative predictive value than the others. Agreement of residual tumor size between CE-MRI and pathology (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58–0.66) and between DW-MRI and pathology (ICC, 0.64; 95% CI: 0.61–0.68) did not differ significantly (p = 0.49). Residual tumor size was underestimated in the HR+/HER2− subtype and overestimated in the HR−/HER2+ subtype. The optimum ADC cut-off was 1.22 × 10−3 mm2/s, with the area under the curve of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.68–0.78). Conclusion DW-MRI demonstrated comparable sensitivity for predicting pCR and agreement in residual invasive tumor size measurement to CE-MRI. ADC can be used as an additional tool for distinguishing residual tumors from post-treatment changes. Key Points <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Question</Emphasis> The effectiveness of diffusion-weighted MRI in predicting tumor response to NAT in breast cancer remains uncertain. <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Findings</Emphasis> Diffusion-weighted MRI demonstrated similar sensitivity to CE-MRI in predicting pCR and comparable accuracy in measuring residual tumor size. <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Clinical relevance</Emphasis> Diffusion-weighted MRI could potentially be used as an alternative or complementary technique to CE-MRI for evaluating tumor response to NAT in patients with breast cancer. Graphical Abstract

Comparison of diffusion-weighted and contrast-enhanced MRI for monitoring response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer

期刊论文
发表日期：

2025年6月24日

查看全文

Hye Joung Eom,
Hak Hee Kim,
Hee Jeong Kim,
Woo Jung Choi,
Eun Young Chae,
Hee Jung Shin,
Joo Hee Cha

摘要

Objectives

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of post-neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) compared to contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) in predicting tumor response in breast cancer.

Materials and methods

Patients with breast cancer who were examined using 3.0-T MRI after NAT and underwent surgery between 2015 and 2018 were studied. Qualitative assessment of pathological complete response (pCR) and size of residual tumor following NAT were evaluated using CE-MRI and DW-MRI with b-values of 0 and 1000 s/mm². Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) cut-off for predicting pCR was estimated using Youden’s Index in lesions with residual high signal intensity. Agreement of residual tumor size at CE-MRI, DW-MRI, and pathology was compared.

Results

A total of 1062 patients (49.3 years ± 9.0) were evaluated. Sensitivity for predicting pCR did not show a significant difference between CE-MRI and DW-MRI (65.3% and 62.9%, p = 0.50). The HR+/HER2− subtype showed significantly lower positive predictive value and higher negative predictive value than the others. Agreement of residual tumor size between CE-MRI and pathology (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58–0.66) and between DW-MRI and pathology (ICC, 0.64; 95% CI: 0.61–0.68) did not differ significantly (p = 0.49). Residual tumor size was underestimated in the HR+/HER2− subtype and overestimated in the HR−/HER2+ subtype. The optimum ADC cut-off was 1.22 × 10⁻³ mm²/s, with the area under the curve of 0.73 (95% CI: 0.68–0.78).

Conclusion

DW-MRI demonstrated comparable sensitivity for predicting pCR and agreement in residual invasive tumor size measurement to CE-MRI. ADC can be used as an additional tool for distinguishing residual tumors from post-treatment changes.

Key Points

Question The effectiveness of diffusion-weighted MRI in predicting tumor response to NAT in breast cancer remains uncertain.

Findings Diffusion-weighted MRI demonstrated similar sensitivity to CE-MRI in predicting pCR and comparable accuracy in measuring residual tumor size.

Clinical relevance Diffusion-weighted MRI could potentially be used as an alternative or complementary technique to CE-MRI for evaluating tumor response to NAT in patients with breast cancer.

Graphical Abstract