Evaluating the role of magnetic resonance imaging post‐neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer in the NEONAB trial

• Published in: Internal medicine journal Vol. 48; no. 6; pp. 699 - 705
• Main Authors: Murphy, Caitlin, Mukaro, Violet, Tobler, Robert, Asher, Rebecca, Gibbs, Emma, West, Linda, Giuffre, Bruno, Baron‐Hay, Sally, Khasraw, Mustafa
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Melbourne John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 01.06.2018; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: Accuracy; Breast cancer; Cyclophosphamide; Epidermal growth factor; Epirubicin; ErbB-2 protein; Magnetic resonance imaging; Monoclonal antibodies; MRI; neoadjuvant systemic therapy; NMR; Nuclear magnetic resonance; Paclitaxel; Targeted cancer therapy; Trastuzumab; Tumors; MRI; breast cancer; neoadjuvant systemic therapy
• ISSN: 1444-0903; 1445-5994
• DOI: 10.1111/imj.13617

Background Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) accuracy after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) for breast cancer varies according to hormone receptor (HR), human epidermal growth factor receptor type‐2 (HER2) subtype and Ki‐67 proliferation index. Whether MRI accuracy varies by genomic signatures is unknown. We examined the accuracy of MRI in the NEONAB trial (Clinicaltrials.gov #: NCT01830244). Aim To examine the accuracy of MRI to predict pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer in the NEONAB trial. Methods Patients with stages II–III breast cancer received sequential epirubicin, cyclophosphamide and nab‐paclitaxel and trastuzumab if they were HER2+. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated to assess the utility of preoperative MRI to predict pathological complete response (pCR). Bland‐Altman plots were used to assess agreement between MRI and pathological assessment of residual disease. Results MRI correctly predicted pCR in 64.1% of the cohort. Sensitivity and specificity were 52% and 78%, respectively; PPV 73% and NPV 58%. MRI predicted pCR most accurately in HER2‐positive patients; sensitivity 58%, specificity 100%, PPV 100% and NPV 38%. MRI had higher PPV and NPV in tumours with Ki‐67 ≥ 15% than tumours with Ki‐67 < 15%, 75% versus 50% and 57.5% versus 50%, respectively. In this study, MRI underestimated residual tumour size by 1.65 mm (limits of agreement: 43.07–39.77 mm). Conclusions MRI appears more accurate for predicting pCR in HER2+ disease than other subtypes and in cancers with Ki‐67 ≥ 15% compared to those with Ki‐67 < 15%. Accuracy of MRI in our HR+, RS ≥ 25 cohort is comparable to previous reports of unselected HR+ disease. MRI post‐NST should be interpreted in conjunction with HER2 status and Ki‐67 index of the primary.