彩色多普勒超声在评价乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效中的临床价值
|
摘要
目的:通过彩色多普勒和能量多普勒超声,观察乳腺癌原发病灶及腋窝淋巴结在新辅助化疗前后,在形态学、血流分级及血流动力学等方面的变化情况,研究彩色多普勒和能量多普勒超声在新辅助化疗疗效评价中的临床应用价值。
方法:对67例入选的乳腺癌患者,均于新辅助化疗后对其进行临床疗效评价、超声检查大小评价、彩色多普勒和能量多普勒超声评价及病理学疗效评价。所有选取病例于化疗前及每个化疗周期结束后48小时内,由同一个人进行超声检查。从多个切面对双乳进行扫查,观察肿瘤大小及形态,并引出彩色多普勒(CDFI)和能量多普勒(PDI)检测肿瘤血流分级,提取血流动力学参数:收缩期血流速度峰值(PSV)、阻力指数(RI)。常规扫查腋窝,测量腋窝淋巴结化疗前后大小变化,观察其形态、结构回声情况。临床疗效评价参照RECIST指南疗效判定标准,病理学疗效评价依照Miller&Payne的评价分级方法。全部数据的比较分析采用SPSS10.0软件进行统计学处理。
结果:在接受新辅助化疗后对全部病例进行病理学疗效评价,其中5级3例,3-4级34例,1-2级30例,病理学评价NCT有效55.22%。临床疗效评价:按照触诊测量结果发现完全缓解(CR)7例,部分缓解(PR)44例,无变化(SD)14例,进展(PD)2例,有效率76.12%。临床疗效评价与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7027,特异度(Sp)0.1667,Kappa值(K)-0.1667,可用度(DA)0.0106。超声检测病灶大小评价:发现乳腺癌原发灶消失5例,乳腺癌原发灶体积缩小40例,乳腺癌原发灶体积无明显变化19例,乳腺癌原发灶体积增大3例,有效率67.16%。超声检查病灶大小与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.8649,特异度(Sp)0.6217,Kappa值(K)0.6513,可用度(DA)0.5842。彩色多普勒超声评价:1、血流分级(型):CDFI检测出血流分级降低的乳腺癌病灶有53例,将发生血流分级降低的病灶认为NCT有效,有率为79.10%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7568,特异度(Sp)0.1667,Kappa值(K)-0.0806,可用度(DA)0.0959;PDI检测出血流分型降低的乳腺癌病灶有57例,将发生血流分型降低的病灶认为NCT有效,有率为85.07%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.8919,特异度(Sp)0.2000,Kappa值(K)0.0981,可用度(DA)0.2927。2、PSV值:经CDFI检查NCT前后病灶PSV值,将PSV值降低的病灶认为NCT疗效,有效率70.15%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7297,特异度(Sp)0.3333,Kappa值(K)0.0651,可用度(DA)0.1345。3、RI值:经CDFI检查NCT前后病灶RI值,将RI值降低的病灶认为NCT疗效,有效率64.18%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.8108,特异度(Sp)0.5667,Kappa值(K)0.5818,可用度(DA)0.5241。4、腋窝淋巴结:在NCT后,有
48例乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结发生消失或缩小改变,将NCT前后腋窝淋巴结发生消失或缩小改变的乳腺癌患者经NCT后有效,有效率为71.64%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7838,特异度(Sp)0.3667,Kappa值(K)0.0779,可用度(DA)0.2238。5、超声测量与RI值联合评价:将超声测量病灶大小与测量RI值联合(串联)来评价NCT疗效,二者均判断有效的30例,有效率44.78%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7027,特异度(Sp)0.8667,Kappa值(K)0.5359,可用度(DA)0.5780。
结论:1、通过超声检测乳腺癌病灶大小对新辅助化疗疗效进行评价,与病理学疗效评价一致性较好。
2、通过彩色多普勒超声检测病灶内RI值的变化对新辅助化疗疗效进行评价,与病理学疗效评价一致性较好。
3、应用彩色多普勒超声联合检测乳腺癌病灶大小和RI值的变化对新辅助化疗疗效进行评价效果好,具有临床应用价值。
Objective Through exploring the changes of the morphology, blood mode and RI value in the primary lesions and axillary lymph nodes before and after NCT, the clinical value of CDFI and PDI are investigated in assessing curative effect of NCT in breast cancer treatment.
Methods The primary lesions and axillary lymph nodes of the selected 67 patients with breast cancer were examined by Doppler ultrasound before and after NCT. All of the sonographical examinations were performed by the same operator with direct contact before NCT and within 48h after NCT. The primary lesions were observed at several sections, including its size, shape, edge, surrounding halo, internal echo and rear echo. Then the hemodynamics parameters were acquired, such as PSV, RI and etc. The axillary lymph nodes were examined, including its size, shape, internal echo and blood mode. Clinical evaluation followed the standard of RECIST, pathological evaluation adopted the classification method of Miller&Payne. The statistical analyses of above data were conducted with the statistical software package SPSS 10.0.
Results There are 37 effective cases (55.22%) according to pathological evaluation. Seven cases with complete release, 44 cases with partial release, 14 cases without significant change and 2 cases with progressing lesions were revealed by palpation. Five cases with vanlish lesion, 40 cases with reducing lesion, 19 cases with unchangeable lesion and 3 cases with increasing size of lesion were showed under ultrasonographic observation. To sum up, it was effective to 67.16% patients. In CDFI and PDI examination:⑴53 cases (79.10%) with decreasing blood mode was uncovered with CDFI after treatment, and 57 cases (85.07%) in PDI examination.⑵70.15% cases were effective with drop of PSV in PDI observation.⑶64.18% cases were effective according to the reducing RI value.⑷changes of 71.64% axillary metastasis lymph nodes were found such as reducing in volume and decreasing of color Doppler signals.⑸If assessing with the size of lesion and RI value at the same time in ultrasonographic, the effective cases are only 18 (26.87%).
Conclusions 1. CDFI is highly consistent with pathological evaluation at the size of lesion to evaluate the curative effect of NCT.
2. The effectiveness rate based on RI value which is acquired from CDFI is close to that from pathological evaluation,.
3. The method of combining the size and RI value of lesions in CFDI examination is superior to those methods which employ one single parameter. Furthermore this comprehensive approach has great clinical significance in assessing curative effect of NCT.
方法:对67例入选的乳腺癌患者,均于新辅助化疗后对其进行临床疗效评价、超声检查大小评价、彩色多普勒和能量多普勒超声评价及病理学疗效评价。所有选取病例于化疗前及每个化疗周期结束后48小时内,由同一个人进行超声检查。从多个切面对双乳进行扫查,观察肿瘤大小及形态,并引出彩色多普勒(CDFI)和能量多普勒(PDI)检测肿瘤血流分级,提取血流动力学参数:收缩期血流速度峰值(PSV)、阻力指数(RI)。常规扫查腋窝,测量腋窝淋巴结化疗前后大小变化,观察其形态、结构回声情况。临床疗效评价参照RECIST指南疗效判定标准,病理学疗效评价依照Miller&Payne的评价分级方法。全部数据的比较分析采用SPSS10.0软件进行统计学处理。
结果:在接受新辅助化疗后对全部病例进行病理学疗效评价,其中5级3例,3-4级34例,1-2级30例,病理学评价NCT有效55.22%。临床疗效评价:按照触诊测量结果发现完全缓解(CR)7例,部分缓解(PR)44例,无变化(SD)14例,进展(PD)2例,有效率76.12%。临床疗效评价与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7027,特异度(Sp)0.1667,Kappa值(K)-0.1667,可用度(DA)0.0106。超声检测病灶大小评价:发现乳腺癌原发灶消失5例,乳腺癌原发灶体积缩小40例,乳腺癌原发灶体积无明显变化19例,乳腺癌原发灶体积增大3例,有效率67.16%。超声检查病灶大小与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.8649,特异度(Sp)0.6217,Kappa值(K)0.6513,可用度(DA)0.5842。彩色多普勒超声评价:1、血流分级(型):CDFI检测出血流分级降低的乳腺癌病灶有53例,将发生血流分级降低的病灶认为NCT有效,有率为79.10%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7568,特异度(Sp)0.1667,Kappa值(K)-0.0806,可用度(DA)0.0959;PDI检测出血流分型降低的乳腺癌病灶有57例,将发生血流分型降低的病灶认为NCT有效,有率为85.07%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.8919,特异度(Sp)0.2000,Kappa值(K)0.0981,可用度(DA)0.2927。2、PSV值:经CDFI检查NCT前后病灶PSV值,将PSV值降低的病灶认为NCT疗效,有效率70.15%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7297,特异度(Sp)0.3333,Kappa值(K)0.0651,可用度(DA)0.1345。3、RI值:经CDFI检查NCT前后病灶RI值,将RI值降低的病灶认为NCT疗效,有效率64.18%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.8108,特异度(Sp)0.5667,Kappa值(K)0.5818,可用度(DA)0.5241。4、腋窝淋巴结:在NCT后,有
48例乳腺癌患者腋窝淋巴结发生消失或缩小改变,将NCT前后腋窝淋巴结发生消失或缩小改变的乳腺癌患者经NCT后有效,有效率为71.64%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7838,特异度(Sp)0.3667,Kappa值(K)0.0779,可用度(DA)0.2238。5、超声测量与RI值联合评价:将超声测量病灶大小与测量RI值联合(串联)来评价NCT疗效,二者均判断有效的30例,有效率44.78%,与病理学评价比较,敏感度(Se)0.7027,特异度(Sp)0.8667,Kappa值(K)0.5359,可用度(DA)0.5780。
结论:1、通过超声检测乳腺癌病灶大小对新辅助化疗疗效进行评价,与病理学疗效评价一致性较好。
2、通过彩色多普勒超声检测病灶内RI值的变化对新辅助化疗疗效进行评价,与病理学疗效评价一致性较好。
3、应用彩色多普勒超声联合检测乳腺癌病灶大小和RI值的变化对新辅助化疗疗效进行评价效果好,具有临床应用价值。
Objective Through exploring the changes of the morphology, blood mode and RI value in the primary lesions and axillary lymph nodes before and after NCT, the clinical value of CDFI and PDI are investigated in assessing curative effect of NCT in breast cancer treatment.
Methods The primary lesions and axillary lymph nodes of the selected 67 patients with breast cancer were examined by Doppler ultrasound before and after NCT. All of the sonographical examinations were performed by the same operator with direct contact before NCT and within 48h after NCT. The primary lesions were observed at several sections, including its size, shape, edge, surrounding halo, internal echo and rear echo. Then the hemodynamics parameters were acquired, such as PSV, RI and etc. The axillary lymph nodes were examined, including its size, shape, internal echo and blood mode. Clinical evaluation followed the standard of RECIST, pathological evaluation adopted the classification method of Miller&Payne. The statistical analyses of above data were conducted with the statistical software package SPSS 10.0.
Results There are 37 effective cases (55.22%) according to pathological evaluation. Seven cases with complete release, 44 cases with partial release, 14 cases without significant change and 2 cases with progressing lesions were revealed by palpation. Five cases with vanlish lesion, 40 cases with reducing lesion, 19 cases with unchangeable lesion and 3 cases with increasing size of lesion were showed under ultrasonographic observation. To sum up, it was effective to 67.16% patients. In CDFI and PDI examination:⑴53 cases (79.10%) with decreasing blood mode was uncovered with CDFI after treatment, and 57 cases (85.07%) in PDI examination.⑵70.15% cases were effective with drop of PSV in PDI observation.⑶64.18% cases were effective according to the reducing RI value.⑷changes of 71.64% axillary metastasis lymph nodes were found such as reducing in volume and decreasing of color Doppler signals.⑸If assessing with the size of lesion and RI value at the same time in ultrasonographic, the effective cases are only 18 (26.87%).
Conclusions 1. CDFI is highly consistent with pathological evaluation at the size of lesion to evaluate the curative effect of NCT.
2. The effectiveness rate based on RI value which is acquired from CDFI is close to that from pathological evaluation,.
3. The method of combining the size and RI value of lesions in CFDI examination is superior to those methods which employ one single parameter. Furthermore this comprehensive approach has great clinical significance in assessing curative effect of NCT.
引文
[1] Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, etal. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy onlocal-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer.findings from nationalsurgical adjuvant breast and bowel project B-18[J]. Clin Oncol, 1997, 15(7): 2483-2493.
[2] Hage JA, Velde CJ, Julien Jp, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breastcancer:result from the European Organization for reserch and treatment of cancer trial 10902[J]. Clin Oncol, 2001, 19(22): 4224-4237.
[3] Londero V, Bazzocchi M., Del Frate C, etal. Locally advanced breast cancer comparison of mammography,sonognlphy and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Eur Radiol, 2004, 14(8): 1371-1379.
[4]Vinnicombe SJ, MacVicar AD, Guy RL, etal. Primary breast cancer mammographic changes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with pathologic correlation[J]. Radiology, 1996, 198(2): 333-340.
[5]Helvie MA, Joynt JH, Cody Rl, etal. Locally advanecd breast carcinoma accuracy of mammography versus clinical examination in the prediction of residual disease after chemotherapy[J]. Radiology, 1996, 198(2): 327-332.
[6]Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, et al. Accurary of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in patients who have undergone neodjuvant chemotherapy[J]. AJR, 2002, 79(5): 1193-1199.
[7]彭玉兰.乳腺超声图谱[M].北京:人民卫生出版社, 2004:80-82.
[8] Adler DD, Carson PL, Rubin JM, et al . Dopp ier ultra2sound col or flow imaging in the study of breat cancer Preli minary findings[J]. Uitrasound Med Biol, 1990, 16(6) : 553-558.
[9]Mansour GM,Ei-Lamie IK,EI-Sayed HM,etal.Preoperative breast ultrasound and Doppler velocimetric findings in Patients with breast cancer[J].EurJ Gynaecol Oncol.2006;27(2):165-167.
[10]Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy prognostic significance and survival[J]. Breast, 2003, 12(2): 320-327.
[11]Valero V, Buzdar AU, McNeese M, etal. Primary chemotherapy in the treatment ofbreast cancer theUniversity of texasmd An-derson Cancer Center experience[J]. Clin Breast Cancer, 2002, 3(2): 63-68.
[12]Insa A, Chirivella I, Lluch A, etal. Neoadjuvant therapy for operable operable breast-cancer[J]. Med Clin (Barc), 2006, 126(8): 295-303.
[13]Kaufmann M, Minckwitz Gv, Bear HD, etal. Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant primary systemic treatment of operable breast cancer new perspectives[J]. Annals of Oncology, 2007, 12(19): 27–34.
[14]Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, etal. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors[J]. NCJ, 2000, 9(2): 205-28.
[15]Padhani AR, Ollivier L ,etal. The RECJST criteria implications for diagnostic radiologists[J]. British Journal of Radio logy, 2001, 7(4): 983-986.
[16]陈进,杭剑萍,孙卫健,等,彩超检查在乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效评估中的价值[J],昆明医学院报, 2006, 27(6): 76-78.
[17]王殊,张嘉庆,乔新民,等.新辅助化疗后乳腺癌病理变化31例分析[J].中国妇产科临床志, 2007, 8(4): 252-254.
[18]王艳滨,陈敏华,张晖,等.腺癌新辅助化疗前后声像图变化的意义[J].中华超声影像学杂志, 2000, 9(8): 471-474.
[19]Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, etal. Accuracy of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in Patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. AJR, 2002,179(5): 1193-1199.
[20]Roubidoux MA, LeCarpentier GL, Fowlkes JB, etal. Sonographic evaluation of early-stage breast cancers that undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Ultrasound Med, 2005, 24: 885-895.
[21]胡军利,向明,陈东风,等.高频超声检查在乳腺癌新辅助化疗评估中的应用价值[J].山东医药, 2007, 47(30): 63-64.
[22]Papetti M, Herman IM. Mechanisms of normaland tumorderived angio-genesis[J]. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, 2002, 282(5): 947-970.
[23]Yang WT, TseG MK, Lamp KW, etal. Correlation between color power Doppler sonographic measurement of breast tumor vasculature and immunohistoehemical analysis of microvessel density for the quantitations of angiogenesis[J]. UL TAAS MED, 2002, 21(11): 1227-1235.
[24]Helvie MA, Joynt LK, Cody RL , etal. Locally advanced bre ast carcinoma: aeeuracy of mammography versus clinieal examination in the prediction of residual disease after chemoth erapy[J]. Radiology, 1996, 198(2): 327-332.
[25]Moon WK, Im JG, Noh DY, etal. Nonpalpable breast lesions evaluation with power Doppler US and a microbubble contrast agentinitial experience[J]. Radiology, 2000, 217(1): 240-246.
[26]Lee SW, Choi HY, Baek SY, etal. Role of color and power Doppler imaging in differentiating between malignant and benign solid breast masses[J]. Clin Ultrasound, 2002, 30(8): 459- 464.
[27]程文,张青萍.多普勒超声对肿瘤新生血管的检测[J].中华超声影像学杂志, 2002, 11(8): 500-501.
[28]季晓听,骆成玉,张键,等.乳腺癌新辅助化疗后腋窝淋巴结的变化[J].中国微创外科杂志, 2006, 6(4): 272-274.
[29]张龙方,李群,段云友,等,乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移超声表现与病理对照[J].中国医学影像技术, 2002, 15(6), 512-521.
[30]王素梅,苏雁欣,田家玮,等.乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移的二维及彩色多普勒超声与病理对照研究[J].中国医学影像技术, 2001, 17(7): 661-665.
[31]杨岩琳,周晓东,罗二平,等.超声对恩度联合新辅助化疗治疗乳腺癌的疗效观察[J].西北国防医学杂志, 2010, 31(1): 49-50.
[1]Chagpar AB, Middleton LP, Sahin AA, et al.Accuracy of physical examination ultrasonography and mammography in predicting residual pathologic tumor size in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J].Ann Surg, 2006, 24(3): 257-264.
[2]滕妍,曹满瑞,孙立宏,等.全数字化乳腺X线摄影在乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效评价上的应用[J].北华大学学报(自然科学版), 2009, 10(2): 133-135.
[3]Sperber F, Weinstein Y, Sarid D, et al. Preoperative clinical mammographic and sonographic assessment of neoadjuvant chemo-therapy response in breast cancer[J]. Isr Med Assoc J, 2006, 8: 342-346.
[4]Roubidoux MA, LeCarpentier GL, Fowlkes JB, et al. Sonographic evaluation of early-stage breast cancers that undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Ultrasound Med, 2005, 24: 885-895.
[5]杨岩琳,周晓东,罗二平,等.超声对恩度联合新辅助化疗治疗乳腺癌的疗效观察[J].西北国防医学杂志, 2010, 31(1): 49-50.
[6]Kuo WH, Chen CN, Hsieh FJ, et al. Vascularity change and tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2008, 34: 857-866.
[7]刘艳丽,聂宏娟,张翠明,等.乳腺肿块能量多普勒超声与微血管密度的相关性研究[J].武警医学院学报, 2008, 17(12): 1055-1057.
[8]Doot RK, Dunnwald LK, Schubert EK, et al. Dynamic and static approaches to quantifying 18F-FDG uptake for measuring cancer response to therapy including the effect of granulocyte CSF[J]. J Nucl Med, 2007, 48:920-925.
[9]贾丽,于金明,王仁本,等. 18F-FDGPET/CT对乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效预测的价值[J].中国肿瘤临床与康复, 2006, 13(3): 215-217.
[10]Duch J, Fuster D, Munoz M, et al.18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer[J]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2009, 36: 1551-1557.
[11]王成刚.乳腺癌PET/CT区域血流灌注和代谢成像的初步应用研究[D].济南:山东大学,2006.
[12]Akazawa K, Tamaki Y, Taguchi T, et al. Preoperative evaluation of residual tumor extent by three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Breast J, 2006, 12: 130-137.
[13]赵林,何翠菊,陈莉,等.动态增强MRI和扩散加权成像在乳腺癌新辅助化疗早期预测疗效的价值[J].中国肿瘤杂志, 2010, 19(5): 351-354.
[14]武春雪,王霄英,秦乃姗,等.磁共振扩散加权成像表观扩散系数对局部进展期乳腺癌新辅助化疗的评估-不同测量方法比较[J].中国医学影像技术杂志, 2009, 25(11): 2036-2039.
[15]汪晓红,彭卫军,谭红娜,等.氢质子磁共振波谱监测乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效的应用研究[J].中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2010, 16(1): 20-24.
[16]赵玉斌,张少华,张积仁,等.新辅助化疗对乳腺癌ER、PR和EphA2表达的影响及意义[J].肿瘤防治研究杂志, 2010, 37(4): 457-460.
[17]包刚,杨德启,周波,等.新辅助化疗对乳腺癌组织中雌激素、孕激素受体及P53和CerbB-2表达的影响[J].中华医学杂志, 2007, 87(40): 2843-2845.
[18]尹洪芳,王韫宏,秦小琪,等.新辅助化疗对乳腺癌的组织学分级和生物学指标表达的影响[J].中华肿瘤杂志, 2009 , 31(11): 326-330.
[19]Berry DA, Cirrincion EC, Henderson IC, etal. Estrogen-receptor status and outcomes ofmodern chemotherapy for patients withnode-positive. breastcancer[J]. JAMA, 2006, 295(14): 1658-1667.
[20]高艳伟,高维实,赖玉书,等. Her-2与乳腺癌研究进展[J].内蒙古医学院学报, 2008, 30(1): 69-72.
[21]ELLIS MJ, COOP A, SINGH B, et al. Letrozole inhibits tumor proliferation moreeffectively than tamoxifen independent of HER1/2 expression status [J]. Cancer Res, 2003, 63(19): 6523-6531.
[22]Gregory RK, Powles TJ, SalterJ, etal. Prognostic relevance of cerbB2 expression following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients in a randomised trial of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2000, 59(2): 171-175.
[23]朱强,王丕琳,宋茂民,等.生物标志与乳腺浸润性导管癌新辅助化疗疗效相关性的多因素分[J].中华肿瘤防治杂志, 2009, 16(10): 779-781.
[24]Dagrad GP, Mezzelania A, LasioL, etal. HER-2/neu assessment in primary chemotherapy treated breast carcinoma no evidence of gene profile changing[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2003, 80(2): 207-14.
[25]屈明,赵建玲,薛军,等.乳腺癌肿瘤生物学因子检测对新辅助化疗方案选择的指导作用[J].山东医药杂志, 2009, 49(48): 59-60.
[26]钦传辉,黄平,莫军扬,等. Ki-67在乳腺癌新辅助化疗中的表达及与病理学相关性研究[J].重庆医学杂志, 2010, 39(5): 545-546.
[27]Miyoshi Y, Kurosumi M, Kurebayashi J, et al . Low nuclear gradebut not cell pr oliferati on p redictive of pathological comp lete re2s ponse to docetaxel in humanbreast cancers[J]. JCancer ResClin Oncol, 2008, 134 (5) : 561-567.
[28]凡庆东,姜军,杨新华,等.乳腺癌p53、cerbB-2表达与TE方案新辅助化疗疗效的关系[J].重庆医科大学学报, 2007, 32(10): 10-59.
[29]Faneyte IF, Schrama JG, Peterse JL, etal. Breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy predictive markers and relation with out-come. Bri JCancer. 2003, 88(3): 406.
[30]白玲,杨涛,唐英,等.粗针穿刺活检评估新辅助化疗乳腺癌30例疗效分析[J].人民军医, 2009, 12: 835.
[31]郑闪,张柏林,邹霜梅,等.乳腺癌新辅助化疗组织学疗效评价研究[J].中华病理学杂志, 2009, (1): 345-346.
[32]Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S ,et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy prognostic significance and survival[J]. Breast, 2003, 12: 320-327.
[2] Hage JA, Velde CJ, Julien Jp, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breastcancer:result from the European Organization for reserch and treatment of cancer trial 10902[J]. Clin Oncol, 2001, 19(22): 4224-4237.
[3] Londero V, Bazzocchi M., Del Frate C, etal. Locally advanced breast cancer comparison of mammography,sonognlphy and MR imaging in evaluation of residual disease in women receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Eur Radiol, 2004, 14(8): 1371-1379.
[4]Vinnicombe SJ, MacVicar AD, Guy RL, etal. Primary breast cancer mammographic changes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy with pathologic correlation[J]. Radiology, 1996, 198(2): 333-340.
[5]Helvie MA, Joynt JH, Cody Rl, etal. Locally advanecd breast carcinoma accuracy of mammography versus clinical examination in the prediction of residual disease after chemotherapy[J]. Radiology, 1996, 198(2): 327-332.
[6]Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, et al. Accurary of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in patients who have undergone neodjuvant chemotherapy[J]. AJR, 2002, 79(5): 1193-1199.
[7]彭玉兰.乳腺超声图谱[M].北京:人民卫生出版社, 2004:80-82.
[8] Adler DD, Carson PL, Rubin JM, et al . Dopp ier ultra2sound col or flow imaging in the study of breat cancer Preli minary findings[J]. Uitrasound Med Biol, 1990, 16(6) : 553-558.
[9]Mansour GM,Ei-Lamie IK,EI-Sayed HM,etal.Preoperative breast ultrasound and Doppler velocimetric findings in Patients with breast cancer[J].EurJ Gynaecol Oncol.2006;27(2):165-167.
[10]Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy prognostic significance and survival[J]. Breast, 2003, 12(2): 320-327.
[11]Valero V, Buzdar AU, McNeese M, etal. Primary chemotherapy in the treatment ofbreast cancer theUniversity of texasmd An-derson Cancer Center experience[J]. Clin Breast Cancer, 2002, 3(2): 63-68.
[12]Insa A, Chirivella I, Lluch A, etal. Neoadjuvant therapy for operable operable breast-cancer[J]. Med Clin (Barc), 2006, 126(8): 295-303.
[13]Kaufmann M, Minckwitz Gv, Bear HD, etal. Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant primary systemic treatment of operable breast cancer new perspectives[J]. Annals of Oncology, 2007, 12(19): 27–34.
[14]Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, etal. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors[J]. NCJ, 2000, 9(2): 205-28.
[15]Padhani AR, Ollivier L ,etal. The RECJST criteria implications for diagnostic radiologists[J]. British Journal of Radio logy, 2001, 7(4): 983-986.
[16]陈进,杭剑萍,孙卫健,等,彩超检查在乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效评估中的价值[J],昆明医学院报, 2006, 27(6): 76-78.
[17]王殊,张嘉庆,乔新民,等.新辅助化疗后乳腺癌病理变化31例分析[J].中国妇产科临床志, 2007, 8(4): 252-254.
[18]王艳滨,陈敏华,张晖,等.腺癌新辅助化疗前后声像图变化的意义[J].中华超声影像学杂志, 2000, 9(8): 471-474.
[19]Partridge SC, Gibbs JE, Lu Y, etal. Accuracy of MR imaging for revealing residual breast cancer in Patients who have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. AJR, 2002,179(5): 1193-1199.
[20]Roubidoux MA, LeCarpentier GL, Fowlkes JB, etal. Sonographic evaluation of early-stage breast cancers that undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Ultrasound Med, 2005, 24: 885-895.
[21]胡军利,向明,陈东风,等.高频超声检查在乳腺癌新辅助化疗评估中的应用价值[J].山东医药, 2007, 47(30): 63-64.
[22]Papetti M, Herman IM. Mechanisms of normaland tumorderived angio-genesis[J]. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol, 2002, 282(5): 947-970.
[23]Yang WT, TseG MK, Lamp KW, etal. Correlation between color power Doppler sonographic measurement of breast tumor vasculature and immunohistoehemical analysis of microvessel density for the quantitations of angiogenesis[J]. UL TAAS MED, 2002, 21(11): 1227-1235.
[24]Helvie MA, Joynt LK, Cody RL , etal. Locally advanced bre ast carcinoma: aeeuracy of mammography versus clinieal examination in the prediction of residual disease after chemoth erapy[J]. Radiology, 1996, 198(2): 327-332.
[25]Moon WK, Im JG, Noh DY, etal. Nonpalpable breast lesions evaluation with power Doppler US and a microbubble contrast agentinitial experience[J]. Radiology, 2000, 217(1): 240-246.
[26]Lee SW, Choi HY, Baek SY, etal. Role of color and power Doppler imaging in differentiating between malignant and benign solid breast masses[J]. Clin Ultrasound, 2002, 30(8): 459- 464.
[27]程文,张青萍.多普勒超声对肿瘤新生血管的检测[J].中华超声影像学杂志, 2002, 11(8): 500-501.
[28]季晓听,骆成玉,张键,等.乳腺癌新辅助化疗后腋窝淋巴结的变化[J].中国微创外科杂志, 2006, 6(4): 272-274.
[29]张龙方,李群,段云友,等,乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移超声表现与病理对照[J].中国医学影像技术, 2002, 15(6), 512-521.
[30]王素梅,苏雁欣,田家玮,等.乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移的二维及彩色多普勒超声与病理对照研究[J].中国医学影像技术, 2001, 17(7): 661-665.
[31]杨岩琳,周晓东,罗二平,等.超声对恩度联合新辅助化疗治疗乳腺癌的疗效观察[J].西北国防医学杂志, 2010, 31(1): 49-50.
[1]Chagpar AB, Middleton LP, Sahin AA, et al.Accuracy of physical examination ultrasonography and mammography in predicting residual pathologic tumor size in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J].Ann Surg, 2006, 24(3): 257-264.
[2]滕妍,曹满瑞,孙立宏,等.全数字化乳腺X线摄影在乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效评价上的应用[J].北华大学学报(自然科学版), 2009, 10(2): 133-135.
[3]Sperber F, Weinstein Y, Sarid D, et al. Preoperative clinical mammographic and sonographic assessment of neoadjuvant chemo-therapy response in breast cancer[J]. Isr Med Assoc J, 2006, 8: 342-346.
[4]Roubidoux MA, LeCarpentier GL, Fowlkes JB, et al. Sonographic evaluation of early-stage breast cancers that undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Ultrasound Med, 2005, 24: 885-895.
[5]杨岩琳,周晓东,罗二平,等.超声对恩度联合新辅助化疗治疗乳腺癌的疗效观察[J].西北国防医学杂志, 2010, 31(1): 49-50.
[6]Kuo WH, Chen CN, Hsieh FJ, et al. Vascularity change and tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer[J]. Ultrasound Med Biol, 2008, 34: 857-866.
[7]刘艳丽,聂宏娟,张翠明,等.乳腺肿块能量多普勒超声与微血管密度的相关性研究[J].武警医学院学报, 2008, 17(12): 1055-1057.
[8]Doot RK, Dunnwald LK, Schubert EK, et al. Dynamic and static approaches to quantifying 18F-FDG uptake for measuring cancer response to therapy including the effect of granulocyte CSF[J]. J Nucl Med, 2007, 48:920-925.
[9]贾丽,于金明,王仁本,等. 18F-FDGPET/CT对乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效预测的价值[J].中国肿瘤临床与康复, 2006, 13(3): 215-217.
[10]Duch J, Fuster D, Munoz M, et al.18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer[J]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2009, 36: 1551-1557.
[11]王成刚.乳腺癌PET/CT区域血流灌注和代谢成像的初步应用研究[D].济南:山东大学,2006.
[12]Akazawa K, Tamaki Y, Taguchi T, et al. Preoperative evaluation of residual tumor extent by three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Breast J, 2006, 12: 130-137.
[13]赵林,何翠菊,陈莉,等.动态增强MRI和扩散加权成像在乳腺癌新辅助化疗早期预测疗效的价值[J].中国肿瘤杂志, 2010, 19(5): 351-354.
[14]武春雪,王霄英,秦乃姗,等.磁共振扩散加权成像表观扩散系数对局部进展期乳腺癌新辅助化疗的评估-不同测量方法比较[J].中国医学影像技术杂志, 2009, 25(11): 2036-2039.
[15]汪晓红,彭卫军,谭红娜,等.氢质子磁共振波谱监测乳腺癌新辅助化疗疗效的应用研究[J].中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2010, 16(1): 20-24.
[16]赵玉斌,张少华,张积仁,等.新辅助化疗对乳腺癌ER、PR和EphA2表达的影响及意义[J].肿瘤防治研究杂志, 2010, 37(4): 457-460.
[17]包刚,杨德启,周波,等.新辅助化疗对乳腺癌组织中雌激素、孕激素受体及P53和CerbB-2表达的影响[J].中华医学杂志, 2007, 87(40): 2843-2845.
[18]尹洪芳,王韫宏,秦小琪,等.新辅助化疗对乳腺癌的组织学分级和生物学指标表达的影响[J].中华肿瘤杂志, 2009 , 31(11): 326-330.
[19]Berry DA, Cirrincion EC, Henderson IC, etal. Estrogen-receptor status and outcomes ofmodern chemotherapy for patients withnode-positive. breastcancer[J]. JAMA, 2006, 295(14): 1658-1667.
[20]高艳伟,高维实,赖玉书,等. Her-2与乳腺癌研究进展[J].内蒙古医学院学报, 2008, 30(1): 69-72.
[21]ELLIS MJ, COOP A, SINGH B, et al. Letrozole inhibits tumor proliferation moreeffectively than tamoxifen independent of HER1/2 expression status [J]. Cancer Res, 2003, 63(19): 6523-6531.
[22]Gregory RK, Powles TJ, SalterJ, etal. Prognostic relevance of cerbB2 expression following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients in a randomised trial of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2000, 59(2): 171-175.
[23]朱强,王丕琳,宋茂民,等.生物标志与乳腺浸润性导管癌新辅助化疗疗效相关性的多因素分[J].中华肿瘤防治杂志, 2009, 16(10): 779-781.
[24]Dagrad GP, Mezzelania A, LasioL, etal. HER-2/neu assessment in primary chemotherapy treated breast carcinoma no evidence of gene profile changing[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2003, 80(2): 207-14.
[25]屈明,赵建玲,薛军,等.乳腺癌肿瘤生物学因子检测对新辅助化疗方案选择的指导作用[J].山东医药杂志, 2009, 49(48): 59-60.
[26]钦传辉,黄平,莫军扬,等. Ki-67在乳腺癌新辅助化疗中的表达及与病理学相关性研究[J].重庆医学杂志, 2010, 39(5): 545-546.
[27]Miyoshi Y, Kurosumi M, Kurebayashi J, et al . Low nuclear gradebut not cell pr oliferati on p redictive of pathological comp lete re2s ponse to docetaxel in humanbreast cancers[J]. JCancer ResClin Oncol, 2008, 134 (5) : 561-567.
[28]凡庆东,姜军,杨新华,等.乳腺癌p53、cerbB-2表达与TE方案新辅助化疗疗效的关系[J].重庆医科大学学报, 2007, 32(10): 10-59.
[29]Faneyte IF, Schrama JG, Peterse JL, etal. Breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy predictive markers and relation with out-come. Bri JCancer. 2003, 88(3): 406.
[30]白玲,杨涛,唐英,等.粗针穿刺活检评估新辅助化疗乳腺癌30例疗效分析[J].人民军医, 2009, 12: 835.
[31]郑闪,张柏林,邹霜梅,等.乳腺癌新辅助化疗组织学疗效评价研究[J].中华病理学杂志, 2009, (1): 345-346.
[32]Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S ,et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy prognostic significance and survival[J]. Breast, 2003, 12: 320-327.