We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparison of strain and shear-wave ultrasounic elastography in predicting the pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancers.
European Radiology 2017 June
OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic performances of strain elastography (SE) and shear-wave elastography (SWE) for predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in patients with breast cancer.
METHODS: This prospective study recruited 71 eligible patients from June 2014 to May 2016. All patients provided written informed consent. Tumour stiffness was assessed by the SE strain ratio (R), SWE maximum elasticity (Emax ) and SWE mean elasticity (Emean ). Ultrasonic elastography (UE) assessments were performed at each NACT cycle (t1 - t6). For the purpose of predicting, the relative changes in elastographic parameters after the first and second NACT cycles were considered as the variables [Δ(t1) and Δ(t2)]. The area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUC) curve was compared.
RESULTS: ΔEmean (t2) and R2 displayed the best diagnostic performances within their own modalities (AUC = 0.93 and 0.90 for predicting favourable response to NACT; AUC = 0.92 and 0.78 for predicting NACT resistance, respectively). There were no significant differences in AUCs for ΔEmean (t2) and some UE parameters (P > 0.05). By contrast, ΔEmean (t2) was significantly superior to all other SE parameters for predicting resistance (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: SE and SWE exhibited similar performances for predicting favourable NACT responses; SWE was better than SE for predicting NACT resistance.
KEY POINTS: • Elastography parameters after the second NACT cycle showed the best diagnostic performances. • SWE and SE yielded similar diagnostic performances in predicting favourable responses. • SWE performed better than SE in predicting the pathological resistance to NACT. • Discrepant results may be due to the breast thickness and lesion depth.
METHODS: This prospective study recruited 71 eligible patients from June 2014 to May 2016. All patients provided written informed consent. Tumour stiffness was assessed by the SE strain ratio (R), SWE maximum elasticity (Emax ) and SWE mean elasticity (Emean ). Ultrasonic elastography (UE) assessments were performed at each NACT cycle (t1 - t6). For the purpose of predicting, the relative changes in elastographic parameters after the first and second NACT cycles were considered as the variables [Δ(t1) and Δ(t2)]. The area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUC) curve was compared.
RESULTS: ΔEmean (t2) and R2 displayed the best diagnostic performances within their own modalities (AUC = 0.93 and 0.90 for predicting favourable response to NACT; AUC = 0.92 and 0.78 for predicting NACT resistance, respectively). There were no significant differences in AUCs for ΔEmean (t2) and some UE parameters (P > 0.05). By contrast, ΔEmean (t2) was significantly superior to all other SE parameters for predicting resistance (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: SE and SWE exhibited similar performances for predicting favourable NACT responses; SWE was better than SE for predicting NACT resistance.
KEY POINTS: • Elastography parameters after the second NACT cycle showed the best diagnostic performances. • SWE and SE yielded similar diagnostic performances in predicting favourable responses. • SWE performed better than SE in predicting the pathological resistance to NACT. • Discrepant results may be due to the breast thickness and lesion depth.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app