Magnetic resonance examination to predict pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: when is it appropriate for HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancers?

Neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive acantholytic squamous cell breast carcinoma: a case report

HER2-positive acantholytic squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) of the breast is exceptionally rare, and its clinicopathologic features are poorly understood. The impact of neoadjuvant therapy on HER2-positive breast ASCC is unclear. Here we report on a 58-year-old woman who was diagnosed with HER2-positive ASCC of the right breast, who underwent neoadjuvant treatment with albumin-paclitaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab, and surgery. Neoadjuvant therapy was effective, with no recurrence or metastasis after 1.5 years of postoperative follow-up.

MRI Performance in Detecting pCR After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy by Molecular Subtype of Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

MRI performance in detecting pathologic complete response (pCR) post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in breast cancer has been previously explored. However, since tumor response varies by molecular subtype, it is plausible that imaging performance also varies. Therefore, we performed a literature review on subtype-specific MRI performance in detecting pCR post-NAC.

METHODS

Two reviewers searched Cochrane, PubMed, and EMBASE for articles published between 2013 and 2018 that examined MRI performance in detecting pCR post-NAC. After filtering, ten primary research articles were included. Statistical metrics, such as sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), were extracted per study for triple negative, HR+/HER2-, and HER2+ patients.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 2310 patients were included. In triple negative breast cancer, MRI showed NPV (58-100%) and PPV (72.7-94.7%) across 446 patients and sensitivity (45.5-100%) and specificity (49-94.4%) in 375 patients. In HR+/HER2- breast cancer patients, MRI showed NPV (29.4-100%) and PPV (21.4-95.1%) across 851 patients and sensitivity (43-100%) and specificity (45-93%) across 780 patients. In HER2+-enriched subtype, MRI showed NPV (62-94.6%) and PPV (34.9-72%) in 243 patients and sensitivity (36.2-83%) and specificity (47-90%) in 255 patients.

CONCLUSION

MRI accuracy in detecting pCR post-NAC by subtype is not as consistent, nor as high, as individual studies suggest. Larger studies using standardized pCR definition with appropriate timing of surgery and MRI need to be conducted. This study has shown that MRI is in fact not an accurate prediction of pCR, and thus, clinicians may need to rely on other approaches such as biopsies of the tumor bed.

The value of pre- and post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy F-18 FDG PET/CT scans in breast cancer: comparison with MRI

Background Accurate assessment of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) response with positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may provide appropriate operation guidelines for individual breast cancer patients. Purpose To compare the values of PET/CT and MRI for response evaluation following NAC in breast cancer patients. Material and Methods Thirty-three consecutive patients who underwent NAC were included. PET/CT and MRI were performed before and one to four weeks after NAC. With response evaluation of PET/CT and MRI, patients with complete/partial responses on imaging studies were considered to be responders, and those showing stable/progressive disease non-responders. Peak standardized uptake value corrected for lean body mass (SULpeak) and metabolic tumor volume (MTV) were measured from PET/CT, and unidimensional diameter (1D) and tumor volume (TV) from MRI. Reduction rates for each parameter were calculated (Δ%SULpeak, Δ%MTV, Δ%1D, and Δ%TV). The pathological response for NAC as reference was evaluated after surgical resection of the remaining tumor in the breast. Results We identified 17 pathological responders and 16 non-responders. PET/CT had lower specificity and accuracy, but higher sensitivity than MRI, although no significant difference was found between PET/CT and MRI. Following NAC, there were significant differences between pathological responders and non-responders in SULpeak ( P < 0.001), MTV ( P < 0.001), 1D ( P = 0.0003), TV ( P = 0.038), Δ%SULpeak ( P = 0.001), Δ%MTV ( P < 0.001), Δ%1D ( P < 0.001), and Δ%TV ( P = 0.001). Conclusion PET/CT showed lower specificity and accuracy than MRI in evaluating responses to NAC, but both PET/CT and MRI parameters may have predictive value in distinguishing therapeutic responders and non-responders following NAC.