Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Angiogenesis and dynamic MR imaging gadolinium enhancement of malignant and benign breast lesions

  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose. To determine whether dynamic magnetic resonance (MR) imagingenhancement parameters are associated with vessel density of malignant andbenign breast lesions. Materials and methods. Forty-five patients with 48breast lesions underwent gadolinium-enhanced spoiled gradient-recalled echo(SPGR) MR imaging followed by excisional biopsy and Factor VIII staining andvessel density measurement in the lesions. Results. The vessel densitieswere not significantly different in 25 malignant breast lesions as comparedto 23 benign breast lesions. Among all 48 lesions, greater MR enhancementshowed an association with increased vessel density. Seventy-four percent ofall lesions with MRI enhancement amplitude greater or equal to three timespost-precontrast ratio had vessel densities greater than the median of 172as compared to 34% of lesions with enhancement amplitude less thanthree times, p = 0.02. The rate and washout of MR enhancement showedno significant association with vessel density. Conclusion. Although thereis an overall significant association between greater MRI enhancementamplitude and vessel density, MRI gadolinium enhancement of breast lesionsis not an accurate predictor of vessel density.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Weidner N, Folkman J: Tumoral vascularity as a prognostic factor in cancer. In: DeVita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds) Important Advances in Oncology 1996. Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia, 1996, pp 167–190

    Google Scholar 

  2. Weidner N, Folkman J, Pozza F, Bevilacqua P, Allred EN, Moore DH, Meli S, Gasparini G: Tumor angiogenesis: a new significant and independent prognostic indicator in early-stage breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 84: 1875–1887, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  3. Toi M, Kashitani J, Tominaga T: Tumor angiogenesis is an independent prognostic indicator of primary breast carcinoma. Int J Cancer 55: 371–374, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gasparini G, Weidner N, Bevilacqua P, Maluta S, Dalla Palma P, Caffo O, Barbareschi M, Boracchi P, Marubini E, Pozza F: Tumor microvessel density, p53 expression, tumor size, and peritumoral lymphatic vessel invasion are relevant prognostic markers in node-negative breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 12: 454–466, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  5. Obermair A, Czerwenka K, Kurz C et al.: Influence of tumoral microvessel density on the recurrence-free survival in human breast cancer: preliminary results. Onkologie 17: 44–49, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  6. Van Hoef MEHM, Knox WF, Dhesi SS, Howell A, Schor AM: Assessment of tumor vascularity as a prognostic factor in lymph node negative invasive breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 29A: 1141–1145, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  7. Miliaras D, Kamas A, Kalekou H: Angiogenesis in invasive breast carcinoma: is it associated with parameters of prognostic significance? Histopathology 26: 165–169, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  8. Axelsson K, Ljung BME, Moore DH, Thor AD, Chew KL, Edgerton SM, Smith HS, Mayall BH: Tumor angiogenesis as a prognostic assay for invasive ductal carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 87: 997–1008, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  9. Weidner N: Intratumor microvessel density as a prognostic factor in cancer. Am J Pathol 147: 9–19, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gasparini G, Harris AL: Clinical importance of the determination of tumor angiogenesis in breast carcinoma: much more than a new prognostic tool. J Clin Oncol 13: 765–782, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  11. Weinreb JC, Newstead G: MR imaging of the breast. Radiology 196: 593–610, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  12. Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, Meiches MD, Jensen RA, Evans WP, Savino DA, Wells RV: MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 187: 493–501, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  13. Heywang-Koebrunner SH: Diagnosis of breast cancer with MR — review after 1250 patient examinations. Electromedica 61: 43–52, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  14. Stack JP, Redmond OM, Codd MB, Dervan PA, Ennis JT: Breast disease: tissue characterization with Gd-DTPA enhancement profiles. Radiology 174: 491–494, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rubens D, Totterman S, Chacko AK, Kothari K, Logan-Young W, Szumowski J, Simon JH, Zachariah E: Gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced chemical-shift MR imaging of the breast. Am J Roentgenol 157: 267–270, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  16. Orel S, Schnall MD, Powell CM, Hochman MG, Solin LJ, Fowble BL, Torosian MH, Rosato EF: Staging of suspected breast cancer: effect of MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy. Radiology 196: 115–122, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  17. Flickinger FW, Allison JD, Sherry RM, Wright JC: Differentiation of benign from malignant breast masses by time-intensity evaluation of contrast enhanced MRI. Magn Res Imaging 11: 617–620, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  18. Orel S, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, Troupin RH: Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlations. Radiology 190: 485–493, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fobben ES, Rubin CZ, Kalisher L, Dembner AG, Seltzer MH, Santoro EJ: Breast MR imaging with commercially available techniques: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 196: 143–152, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  20. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, Winston JS, Edge SB, Arredondo MA, Mazurchuk RV, Blumenson LE: Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 197: 387–395, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  21. Frouge C, Guinebretière JM, Contesso G, Di Paola R, Bléry M: Correlation between contrast enhancement in dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the breast and tumor angiogenesis. Investigative Radiology 29(12): 1043–1049, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  22. Gilles R, Zafrani B, Guinebretière JM, Meunier M, Lucidarme O, Tardivon AA, Rochard F, Vanel D, Neuenschwander S, Arriagada R: Ductal carcinoma in situ: MR imaging-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 196: 415–419, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hulka CA, Smith BL, Sgroi DC, Tan L, Edmister WB, Semple JP, Campbell T, Kopans DB, Brady TJ, Weisskoff RM: Benign and malignant breast lesions: differentiation with echo-planar MR imaging. Radiology 197: 33–38, 1995

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fleiss JL: Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1981, pp 20–27

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jain RK: Barriers to drug delivery in solid tumors. Scientific American 271(1): 58–65, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  26. Jain RK: 1995 Whitaker Lecture: delivery of molecules, particles, and cells to solid tumors. Ann Biomed Engin 24: 457–473, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  27. Guidi AJ, Fischer L, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ: Microvessel density and distribution in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst 86: 614–619, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  28. van Dijke CF, Brasch RC, Roberts TPL, Weidner N, Mathur A, Shames DM, Mann JS, Demsar F, Lang P, Schwickert HC: Mammary carcinoma model: correlation of macromolecular contrast enhanced MR imaging characterizations of tumor microvasculature and histologic capillary density. Radiology 198: 813–818, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schwickert H, Stiskal M, Roberts T, van Dijke CF, Mann J, Muhler A, Shames DM, Demsar F, Disston A, Brasch RC: Contrast-enhanced MRI assessment of tumor capillary permeability: the effect of pre-irradiation on the tumor delivery of chemotherapy. Radiology 198: 893–898, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cohen FM, Kuwatsuru R, Shames DM, Neuder M, Mann JS, Vexler V, Rosenau W, Brasch RC: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging estimation of altered capillary permeability in experimental mammary carcinomas after x-irradiation. Invest Radiol 29: 970–977, 1994

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Diagnostic Imaging, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA

    Paul C. Stomper, Steven Herman & Donald L. Klippenstein

  2. Department of Pathology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA

    Janet S. Winston

  3. Division of Surgical Oncology, Breast Department, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA

    Mark A. Arredondo

  4. Department of Biomathematics, Roswell Cancer Institute, Roswell Park Graduate Division, Department of Biometry, SUNY at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA

    Leslie E. Blumenson

Authors
  1. Paul C. Stomper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Janet S. Winston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven Herman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Donald L. Klippenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mark A. Arredondo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Leslie E. Blumenson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stomper, P.C., Winston, J.S., Herman, S. et al. Angiogenesis and dynamic MR imaging gadolinium enhancement of malignant and benign breast lesions. Breast Cancer Res Treat 45, 39–46 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005897227030

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005897227030

Search

Navigation