Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
September 14, 2026BMC CancerOpen Access

Correlation between quantitative parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient of 3.0T dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and prognostic factors and molecular classification of breast cancer

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

JFJieting FuQJQiaosheng JiangCSChen Sun

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Retrospective study demonstrates DCE-MRI and ADC parameters correlate with molecular subtypes in breast cancer, suggesting multivariable imaging can identify triple-negative disease preoperatively.

Key Points

  • To evaluate the correlation between quantitative DCE-MRI parameters, ADC, and breast cancer prognostic factors or molecular subtypes, and to develop a multivariable model for identifying triple-negative breast cancer.
  • Retrospective analysis of 746 patients with surgically and pathologically confirmed breast cancer who underwent preoperative 3.0T DCE-MRI and DWI between January 2016 and January 2019.
  • Quantitative parameters (Ktrans, Kep, Ve) were calculated using the extended Tofts model alongside ADC values, with inter-reader reproducibility assessed in 100 lesions.
  • Multivariable logistic regression was used to model preoperative triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) identification, evaluated by area under the ROC curve (AUC).
  • After Bonferroni correction, ER and PR status negatively correlated with Ktrans, Kep, and ADC (all P < 0.001), while Ki-67 positively correlated with Ktrans and Kep (all P < 0.001).
  • TNBC lesions showed the highest mean Ktrans (2.45 ± 0.45 min⁻¹), highest Kep (6.40 ± 0.71 min⁻¹), and lowest Ve (0.42 ± 0.15), with Kep yielding the highest single-parameter AUC for TNBC (0.826, 95% CI 0.789–0.863).
  • A multivariable logistic regression model combining Ktrans, Kep, and inverted Ve achieved an AUC of 0.891 (95% CI 0.857–0.926), significantly outperforming any individual parameter (DeLong P < 0.001).

Cite This Study

Fu et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa7b2f70926e14a848b18a2https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-026-16485-2
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Correlation analysis of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging features and molecular subtypes of breast cancer.2025
  2. 2Evaluating the predictive value of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and six diffusion models for prognostic factors in mass-type invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast2026
  3. 3 Assing the role of combined ultrafast breast MRI and diffusion-weighted image in predicting breast cancer prognosis: A prospective comparative study.2024
  4. 4Conventional, time‐dependent, and continuous‐time random‐walk diffusion‐weighted imaging models in microstructural characterization of breast lesions at 3.0T: A prospective analysis2025 · 3 citations
  5. 5Time-dependent diffusion MRI as in vivo histology: microstructural biomarkers for breast cancer diagnosis and prognostic stratification2026