Is there a Specific Magnetic Resonance Phenotype Characteristic of Hereditary Breast Cancer?

Aims and background The aim of the study was to investigate the growth rate of inherited breast cancer, to analyze its T2 signal intensity besides kinetic and morphologic aspects, and to verify whether there is any correlation between magnetic resonance imaging phenotype and BRCA status. Methods Between June 2000 and September 2009, we enrolled 227 women at high genetic risk for breast cancer in a surveillance program, within a multicenter project of the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Rome). Results Thirty-four cancers were detected among 31 subjects. One patient refused magnetic resonance imaging because of claustrophobia. Compared with sporadic disease, hereditary cancer showed some differences, in terms of biologic attitude and semeiotic patterns. These differences were mainly registered for magnetic resonance imaging, where the most frequent radiological variant was represented by the very high T2 signal intensity (73%). Moreover, the size of 8 of the neoplasms showed a significant increase in less than one year, 5 of them in less than 6 months. Six lesions were in BRCA1 patients and the remaining in BRCA2. Furthermore, cancers with a high growth rate also demonstrated a significant increment in T2 signal intensity. Conclusions Our results confirmed the high growth rate within BRCA-related breast cancers, especially for BRCA1 mutation carriers. In our experience, we found a specific imaging phenotype, represented by the high T2 signal intensity of hereditary breast cancer. To our knowledge, this is the first report that points out this new semeiotic parameter, which is usually typical of benign lesions. Considering the correlation between high growth rate and high T2 signal intensity, the former seems to be related to the absence of induction of a desmoplastic reaction that could somehow restrict cancer growth.

[1]  Kjell Arne Kvistad,et al.  Sensitivity of MRI versus conventional screening in the diagnosis of BRCA-associated breast cancer in a national prospective series. , 2007, Breast.

[2]  M. Stratton,et al.  Multifactorial analysis of differences between sporadic breast cancers and cancers involving BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. , 1998, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[3]  T. Walsh,et al.  Tamoxifen and breast cancer incidence among women with inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP-P1) Breast Cancer Prevention Trial. , 2001, JAMA.

[4]  C. Kuhl,et al.  Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. , 2008, Radiology.

[5]  M. Coleman,et al.  Stage at diagnosis is a key explanation of differences in breast cancer survival across Europe , 2003, International journal of cancer.

[6]  G. Mariani,et al.  Lobular Breast Cancer: How Useful is Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging? , 2001, Tumori.

[7]  C. Kuhl,et al.  Management of women at high risk for breast cancer: new imaging beyond mammography. , 2005, Breast.

[8]  C. Kuhl,et al.  Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? , 1999, Radiology.

[9]  F. Podo,et al.  MRI in the Early Detection of Breast Cancer in Women with High Genetic Risk , 2006, Tumori.

[10]  D B Plewes,et al.  Comparison of breast magnetic resonance imaging, mammography, and ultrasound for surveillance of women at high risk for hereditary breast cancer. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  C. Kuhl.  Screening with magnetic resonance , 2006 .

[12]  D. Visscher,et al.  Centrally Necrotizing Carcinomas of the Breast: A Distinct Histologic Subtype With Aggressive Clinical Behavior , 2001, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[13]  T. Sellers,et al.  Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. , 2001, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[14]  Ellen Warner,et al.  Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination , 2004, JAMA.

[15]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  Hereditary breast cancer growth rates and its impact on screening policy. , 2005, European journal of cancer.

[16]  Elizabeth A Morris,et al.  MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  E. Sickles,et al.  Wolfe mammographic parenchymal patterns and breast cancer risk. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  Laura Cortesi,et al.  Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. , 2007, Radiology.

[19]  J. Cigudosa,et al.  Immunohistochemical characteristics defined by tissue microarray of hereditary breast cancer not attributable to BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations: differences from breast carcinomas arising in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. , 2003, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[20]  R Holland,et al.  Mammographically occult breast cancer: A pathologic and radiologic study , 1983, Cancer.

[21]  Ilaria D'Ambrosio,et al.  Breast MRI: Are T2 IR sequences useful in the evaluation of breast lesions? , 2009, European journal of radiology.

[22]  Theo van der Kwast,et al.  A BRCA1/2 mutation, high breast density and prominent pushing margins of a tumor independently contribute to a frequent false‐negative mammography , 2002, International journal of cancer.

[23]  C. Kuhl,et al.  Do T2‐weighted pulse sequences help with the differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions in dynamic breast MRI? , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[24]  H. D. de Koning,et al.  Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  M. Stratton.  Pathology of familial breast cancer: differences between breast cancers in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and sporadic cases , 1997, The Lancet.

[26]  R. Fimmers,et al.  Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. , 2005, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[27]  C. Seynaeve,et al.  Contralateral recurrence and prognostic factors in familial non‐BRCA1/2‐associated breast cancer , 2006, The British journal of surgery.

[28]  R. J. Brenner.  BRCA1 Mutation and Young Age Predict Fast Breast Cancer Growth in the Dutch, United Kingdom, and Canadian Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Trials , 2008 .

[29]  D Krebs,et al.  Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. , 2000, Radiology.

[30]  B. Grube,et al.  MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population , 2004 .

[31]  Francesco Sardanelli,et al.  Breast MR imaging in women at high-risk of breast cancer. Is something changing in early breast cancer detection? , 2007, European Radiology.

[32]  I. Henderson,et al.  Are breast cancers in young women qualitatively distinct? , 1997, The Lancet.

[33]  J. Klijn,et al.  Effectiveness of breast cancer surveillance in BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers and women with high familial risk. , 2001, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[34]  A R Padhani,et al.  Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS) , 2005, The Lancet.

[35]  A. Howell,et al.  Surveillance for familial breast cancer: Differences in outcome according to BRCA mutation status , 2007, International journal of cancer.

[36]  R. Mann,et al.  Breast tumor characteristics of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers on MRI , 2008, European Radiology.