Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 182

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

MRI evaluation of pathologically complete response and residual tumors in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Chen, Jeon Hor, Feig, Byon, Agrawal, Garima, Yu, Hon, Carpenter, Philip M., Mehta, Rita S., Nalcioglu, Orhan, Su, Min Ying·2008·Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND.: This study investigated the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in evaluation of pathologically complete response and residual tumors in patients who were receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for both positive and negative HER‐2 breast cancer. METHODS.: Fifty‐one individuals, comprised of 25 HER‐2 positive and 26 HER‐2 negative patients, were included in the study. Serial MRI studies were acquired before, during, and after NAC. On the basis of the final MRI, response was determined to be a clinically complete response ([CCR], no enhancement), probable CCR (residual enhancement equal to or less than that of glandular tissue), or residual tumor. All patients received surgery. Pathological outcomes were categorized as 1) no residual cancer, 2) no residual invasive cancer but ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) present, or 3) residual invasive cancer. The pathologically complete response (pCR) was defined as no invasive cancer. RESULTS.: Complete clinical response as seen through MRI, including CCR and probable CCR, was identified in 35 (35 of 51, 69%) patients. MRI correctly diagnosed pCR in 26 (26 of 35, 74%) patients, including 18 of 19 (95%) patients in the HER‐2 positive group and 8 of 16 (50%) patients in the HER‐2 negative group (P < .005). The accuracy of MRI in identifying pCR varied according to the chemotherapy agent that was administered. MRI was more accurate in identifying pCR in patients who were receiving trastuzumab and less accurate in patients receiving bevacizumab. The high false‐negative rate found in HER‐2 negative patients was associated with residual disease that presented as scattered cells or small foci. In cases with residual bulk tumor, the lesion size, determined by MRI, correlated highly with that found in histopathological measurements (r = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS.: MRI may predict pCR with high accuracy in HER‐2 positive patients, but it has a high false‐negative rate in HER‐2 negative patients, particularly in patients who are receiving antiangiogenic agents. Results indicate that the chemotherapy agent should be taken into consideration when using MRI to interpret therapeutic outcomes. More studies are needed to establish the role of MRI in managing, especially surgical planning, patients who are receiving NAC. Cancer 2008. © 2007 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.23130

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 182

Metadata

Authors
Chen, J. H., Feig, B., Agrawal, G., Yu, H., Carpenter, P. M., Mehta, R. S., Nalcioglu, O., & Su, M. Y.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-11-13
Volume
112
Issue
1
Pages
17-26
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W2075574347
Cited by
182
References
0
FWCI
9.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MRI evaluation of pathologically complete response and residual tumors in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.23130
The paper
Chen, J. H., Feig, B., Agrawal, G., Yu, H., Carpenter, P. M., Mehta, R. S., Nalcioglu, O., & Su, M. Y. (2008). MRI evaluation of pathologically complete response and residual tumors in breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23130

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.