Sequential Magnetic Resonance and Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Therapy



Imaging has been shown to be effective and efficacious in detecting and diagnosing breast cancer. Meta-analyses and randomized clinical trials have showed that screening mammography may result in a mortality reduction of 28 to 42% (1,2). A recent report noted that the mortality reduction associated with regular screening mammography might be greater than 60% (3). In addition, studies have noted the benefits of screening sonography in identifying nonpalpable, mammographically occult breast cancers (4). In recent years, the role of imaging has expanded beyond the detection of breast cancers to include monitoring response to preoperative chemotherapy. In this chapter, we discuss the rationale for preoperative chemotherapy and review methods for assessing response to preoperative chemotherapy. Physical examination, mammography, and sonography are examined, with particular emphasis on the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).


Breast Cancer Positron Emission Tomography Invasive Ductal Carcinoma Preoperative Chemotherapy Magn Reson Image 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Feig SA. Role and evaluation of mammography and other imaging methods for breast cancer detection, diagnosis, and staging. Semin Nucl Med 1999;29:3–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Whitman GJ. The role of mammography in breast cancer prevention. Curr Opin Oncol 1999;11:414–418.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, Yen MF, Duffy SW, Smith RA. Beyond randomized controlled trials: organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast carcinoma mortality. Cancer 2001;91:1724–1731.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US-diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 1998;207, 191–199.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Meric F, Mirza NQ, Buzdar AU, et al. Prognostic implications of pathological lymph node status after preoperative chemotherapy for operable T3NOM0 breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7, 435–440.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on localregional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:2483–2493.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schwartz GF, Birchansky CA, Komarnicky LT, et al. Induction chemotherapy followed by breast conservation for locally advanced carcinoma of the breast. Cancer 1994;73:362–369.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kling KM, Ostrzega N, Schmit P. Breast conservation after induction chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. Am Surg 1997;63:861–864.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Brambilla C, et al. Primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: eight-year experience at the Milan Cancer Institute. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:93–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kuerer HM, Sahin AA, Hunt KK, et al. Incidence and impact of documented eradication of breast cancer axillary lymph node metastases before surgery in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg 1999;230:72–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reynolds HE, Lesnefsky MH, Jackson VP. Tumor marking before primary chemotherapy for breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;173:919–920.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosen EL, Vo TT. Metallic clip deployment during stereotactic breast biopsy: retrospective analysis. Radiology 2001;218:510–516.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Edeiken BS, Fornage BD, Bedi DG, et al. US-guided implantation of metallic markers for permanent localization of the tumor bed in patients with breast cancer who undergo preoperative chemotherapy. Radiology 1999;213:895–900.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Segel MC, Paulus DD, Hortobagyi GN. Advanced primary breast cancer: assessment at mammography of response to induction chemotherapy. Radiology 1988;169:49–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weatherall PT, Evans GF, Metzger GJ, Saborrian MH, Leitch AM. MRI vs. histologic measurement of breast cancer following chemotherapy: comparison with x-ray mammography and palpation. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13:868–875.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Helvie MA, Joynt LK, Cody RL, Pierce LJ, Adler DD, Merajver SD. Locally advanced breast carcinoma: accuracy of mammography vs clinical examination in the prediction of residual disease after chemotherapy. Radiology 1996;198:327–332.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Davis PL, McCarty SK Jr. Technologic considerations for breast tumor size assessment. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 1994;2:623–631.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tresserra F, Feu J, Grases PJ, Navarro B, Alegret X, Fernandez-Cid A. Assessment of breast cancer size: sonographic and pathologic correlation. J Clin Ultrasound 1999;27:485–491.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol 2000:18:3495–3502.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wahl RL. Current status of PET in breast cancer imaging, staging, and therapy. Semin Roentgenol 2001;36:250–260.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kabasakal L, Ozker K, Hayward M, et al. Technetium-99m sestamibi uptake in human breast carcinoma cell lines displaying glutathione-associated drug-resistance. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:568–570.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mankoff DA, Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, Ellis GK, Drucker MJ, Livingston RB. Monitoring the response of patients with locally advanced breast carcinoma to neoadjuvant chemotherapy using [technetium 99m]-sestamibi scintimammography. Cancer 1999;85:2410–2423.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Heywang SH, Hahn D, Schmidt H, et al. MR imaging of the breast using gadolinium-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1986;10:199–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hylton NM. Vascularity assessment of breast lesions with gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2001;9:321–331.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weidner N, Folkman J, Pozza F, et al. Tumor angiogenesis: a new significant and independent prognostic indicator in early state breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992;84:1875–1886.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Buadu LD, Murakami J, Murayama S, et al. Breast lesions: correlation of contrast medium enhancement patterns on MR images with histopathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. Radiology 1996;200:639–649.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Daniel BL, Birdwell RL, Butts K, et al. Freehand iMRI-guided large-gauge core needle biopsy: a new minimally invasive technique for diagnosis of enhancing breast lesions. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13:896–902.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rieber A, Zeitler H, Rosenthal H, et al. MRI of breast cancer: influence of chemotherapy on sensitivity. Br J Radiol 1997;70:452–458.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Abraham DC, Jones RC, Jones SE, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic response of locally advanced breast cancer by magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 1996;78:91–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kaplan O, Cohen JS. Metabolism of breast cancer cells as revealed by non-invasive magnetic resonance spectroscopy studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1994;31:285–299.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hynynen K, Pomeroy O, Smith DN, et al. MR imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery of fibroadenomas in the breast: a feasibility study. Radiology 2001;219:176–185.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Huber PE, Jenne JW, Rastert R, et al. A new noninvasive approach to breast cancer therapy using magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Cancer Res 2001;61:8441–8447.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc. Totowa, NJ 2003

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations