The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Response Monitoring of Breast Cancer During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Relevance of Breast Cancer Subtype
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the relevance of breast cancer subtypes for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) markers for monitoring of therapy response during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). Patients and Methods: MRI examinations were performed in 188 women before and during NAC. MRI interpretation included lesion morphology at baseline, changes in morphology, size, and contrast uptake kinetics (initial and late enhancement). By using immunohistochemistry, tumors were divided into three subtypes: triple negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positive, and estrogen receptor (ER) positive/HER2 negative. Tumor response was assessed dichotomously (ie, presence or absence of residual tumor in the surgical specimen). Complementary, a continuous scale assessment was used (the breast response index [BRI], representing the relative change in tumor stage). Multivariate regression analysis and receiver operating characteristic analysis were employed to establish significant associations. Results: Residual tumor at pathology was present in 31 (66%) of 47 triple-negative tumors, 23 (61%) of 38 HER2-positive tumors, and 96 (93%) of 103 ER-positive/HER2-negative tumors. Multivariate analysis of residual disease showed significant associations between breast cancer subtype and MRI (area under the curve [AUC], 0.84; P < .001). BRI also showed significant correlation among breast cancer subtype, MRI, and age (Pearson's r = 0.465; P < .001). In subset analysis, this was only significant for triple-negative tumors (P < .001) and HER2-positive tumors (P < .05). Residual tumor after NAC in the triple-negative and HER2-positive group is significantly associated with the change in largest diameter of late enhancement during NAC (AUC, 0.76; P < .001). No associations were found for ER-positive/HER2-negative tumors. Conclusion: MRI during NAC to monitor response is effective in triple-negative or HER2-positive disease but is inaccurate in ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Molecular portraits of human breast tumours
Perou, C. M., Sørlie, T., Eisen, M. B., van de Rijn, M., Jeffrey, S. S., Rees, C. A., Pollack, J. R., Ross, D. T., Johnsen, H., Akslen, L. A., et al. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35021093 · Cited by 16,261
The Triple Negative Paradox: Primary Tumor Chemosensitivity of Breast Cancer Subtypes
Carey, L. A., Dees, E. C., Sawyer, L., Gatti, L., Moore, D. T., Collichio, F., Ollila, D. W., Sartor, C. I., Graham, M. L., & Perou, C. M. (2007) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-06-1109 · Cited by 2,087
Fisher, B., Brown, A., Mamounas, E., Wieand, S., Robidoux, A., Margolese, R. G., Cruz, A. B., Fisher, E. R., Wickerham, D. L., Wolmark, N., et al. (1997) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1997.15.7.2483 · Cited by 1,801
Rastogi, P., Anderson, S. J., Bear, H. D., Geyer, C. E., Kahlenberg, M. S., Robidoux, A., Margolese, R. G., Hoehn, J. L., Vogel, V. G., Dakhil, S. R., et al. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.15.0235 · Cited by 1,789
The molecular portraits of breast tumors are conserved across microarray platforms
Hu, Z., Fan, C., Oh, D. S., Marron, J., He, X., Qaqish, B. F., Livasy, C., Carey, L. A., Reynolds, E., Dressler, L., et al. (2006) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/1471-2164-7-96 · Cited by 1,491
Wolmark, N., Wang, J., Mamounas, E., Bryant, J., & Fisher, B. (2001) · JNCI Monographs · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a003469 · Cited by 1,299
Buzdar, A. U., Ibrahim, N. K., Francis, D., Booser, D. J., Thomas, E. S., Theriault, R. L., Pusztai, L., Green, M. C., Arun, B. K., Giordano, S. H., et al. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2005.07.032 · Cited by 1,171
van der Hage, J. A., van de Velde, C. J. H., Julien, J.-P., Tubiana-Hulin, M., Vandervelden, C., Duchateau, L., & Cooperating Investigators (2001) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2001.19.22.4224 · Cited by 1,107
Biological Processes Associated with Breast Cancer Clinical Outcome Depend on the Molecular Subtypes
Desmedt, C., Haibe-Kains, B., Wirapati, P., Buyse, M., Larsimont, D., Bontempi, G., Delorenzi, M., Piccart, M., & Sotiriou, C. (2008) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-07-4756 · Cited by 828
Fisher, E. R., Wang, J., Bryant, J., Fisher, B., Mamounas, E., & Wolmark, N. (2002) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.10741 · Cited by 413
Cited by
Mann, R. M., Cho, N., & Moy, L. (2019) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2019182947 · Cited by 917
Lobbes, M. B. I., Prevos, R., Smidt, M., Tjan-Heijnen, V. C. G., van Goethem, M., Schipper, R., Beets-Tan, R. G., & Wildberger, J. E. (2013) · Insights into Imaging · doi:10.1007/s13244-013-0219-y · Cited by 237
Huang, Y., Zhu, T., Zhang, X., Li, W., Zheng, X., Cheng, M., Ji, F., Zhang, L., Yang, C., Wu, Z., et al. (2023) · eClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101899 · Cited by 175
Metadata
- Authors
- Loo, C. E., Straver, M. E., Rodenhuis, S., Muller, S. H., Wesseling, J., Vrancken Peeters, M.-J. T. F. D., & Gilhuijs, K. G. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2011-02-20
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 660-666
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2166457180
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 29
- FWCI
- 19.53
- 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: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Response Monitoring of Breast Cancer During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Relevance of Breast Cancer Subtype. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2010.31.1258
- The paper
- Loo, C. E., Straver, M. E., Rodenhuis, S., Muller, S. H., Wesseling, J., Vrancken Peeters, M.-J. T. F. D., & Gilhuijs, K. G. A. (2011). Magnetic Resonance Imaging Response Monitoring of Breast Cancer During Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Relevance of Breast Cancer Subtype. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2010.31.1258
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.
