[摘要] 目的 探討體素內(nèi)不相干運動(intravoxel incoherent motion,IVIM)成像參數(shù)在乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)鑒別診斷及其與乳腺癌Ki-67受體表達相關(guān)性中的應(yīng)用價值。方法 分析2022年10月至2025年1月在嘉興市第二醫(yī)院完成乳腺3.0 T磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging,MRI)且手術(shù)病理結(jié)果完備的41例女性患者資料。采集常規(guī)圖像和11個b值的擴散加權(quán)圖像,在每個病變的感興趣區(qū)域測量并計算IVIM成像真實擴散系數(shù)(real diffusion coefficient,D)、偽擴散系數(shù)(perfusion related diffusion coefficient,D*)、血液容積分數(shù)(perfusion fraction,f)。受試者操作特征曲線量化IVIM成像各參數(shù)在乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)中的鑒別診斷效能。分析各參數(shù)在乳腺結(jié)節(jié)良惡性組間及其在乳腺癌Ki-67受體不同表達組間的差異,并統(tǒng)計各參數(shù)與乳腺癌Ki-67表達水平之間的相關(guān)性。結(jié)果 乳腺結(jié)節(jié)良性組D值明顯高于惡性組,D*值明顯低于惡性組,良惡性組間的差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(t=–4.773,t=2.063,Plt;0.05);良性組f值略低于惡性組,兩組差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(t=0.035,Pgt;0.05)。IVIM成像各參數(shù)中D值對乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)鑒別診斷效能最佳,曲線下面積(area under the curve,AUC)為0.870(95%CI:0.755~0.985),特異性為75.0%;D*值的鑒別診斷效能僅次于D值,AUC為0.789(95%CI:0.658~0.920),但其敏感度最高(88.2%);f值的鑒別診斷效能最差,遠不及D、D*值。乳腺癌Ki-67高表達組的D值低于低表達組,而D*、f值在高表達組中均高于低表達組,IVIM各成像參數(shù)在兩組間差異均無統(tǒng)計學意義(t=–2.617,t=2.169,t=0.647,Pgt;0.05)。Ki-67受體表達與D值之間呈顯著負相關(guān)(r=–0.615,Plt;0.05),與D*、f值之間均未見明顯相關(guān)性(r=0.223,r=0.031,Pgt;0.05)。結(jié)論 IVIM成像各參數(shù)中D、D*值在乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)鑒別診斷中均具有一定的臨床價值。
[關(guān)鍵詞] 體素內(nèi)不相干運動;磁共振成像;結(jié)節(jié);乳腺癌
[中圖分類號] R445.2;R737.9" """"[文獻標識碼] A """""[DOI] 10.3969/j.issn.1673-9701.2025.21.002
The value of IVIM in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast nodules
WANG Xinyu, ZHANG Jingjing, ZHANG Songli, WANG Chaofan, SHEN Weiying, QIAO Hongmei, CHEN Yuan, ZHANG Yu, LIU Hu
Department of Radiology, the Second Hospital of Jiaxing City, Jiaxing 314000, Zhejiang, China
[Abstract] Objective To explore the application value of intravoxel incoherent motion (IVIM) imaging parameters in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast nodules and their correlation with the expression of Ki-67 receptor in breast cancer. Methods The data of 41 female patients who completed 3.0 T breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with complete surgical pathology results in the Second Hospital of Jiaxing City from October 2022 to January 2025 were analysed and evaluated. Conventional images and diffusion-weighted images with 11 b values were collected. The IVIM imaging parameters of real diffusion coefficient (D), perfusion related diffusion coefficient (D*) and perfusion fraction (f) were measured and calculated in the region of interest of each lesion. The receiver operating characteristic curve were plotted to quantify the differential diagnostic efficacy of each parameter of IVIM imaging in benign and malignant breast nodules. The differences of parameters between benign and malignant breast nodules and between the groups with different expression levels of Ki-67 receptor in breast cancer were analysed, and the correlation between each parameter and the expression level of Ki-67 in breast cancer was counted. Results The D value of benign breast nodules group (benign groups) was significantly higher than that of malignant breast nodules group (malignant groups), and the D* value was significantly lower than that of malignant group, and the differences between benign group and malignant group were statistically significant (t=–4.773, t=2.063, Plt;0.05); The f value of benign group was slightly lower than that of malignant group, and the differences between two groups were not statistically significant (t=0.035, Pgt;0.05). Among the parameters of IVIM imaging, D value had the best differential diagnostic efficacy for benign and malignant breast nodules, with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.870 (95%CI: 0.755-0.985) and a specificity of 75.0%; D* value had the second best differential diagnostic efficacy after D value, with an AUC of 0.789 (95%CI: 0.658-0.920), but it had the highest sensitivity of 88.2%; And the differential diagnosis efficiency of f value was the worst, much less than D and D* values. The D value in the high Ki-67 expression group of breast cancer was lower than that in the low expression group, while the D* and f values in the high expression group were higher than that in the low expression group, and the differences of each imaging parameter of IVIM were not statistically significant between two groups (t=–2.617, t=2.169, t=0.647, Pgt;0.05). There was a significant negative correlation between the expression of the Ki-67 receptor and the D value (r=–0.615, Plt;0.05), and no significant correlation was seen with either D* or f value (r=0.223, r=0.031, Pgt;0.05). Conclusion The D and D* values of IVIM imaging parameters have great clinical value in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast nodules.
[Key words] Intravoxel incoherent motion; Magnetic resonance imaging; Nodule; Breast cancer
乳腺結(jié)節(jié)為高發(fā)腫瘤之一,多存在異質(zhì)性特征和復(fù)雜的血液流動,且嚴重威脅女性的健康甚至生命。據(jù)報道,每年約有200萬人確診為乳腺癌[1]。因此極有必要對乳腺癌進行及時準確的鑒別診斷。當前,針對乳腺癌的研究已達病理水平,精準評估乳腺癌患者受體表達不僅有助于臨床醫(yī)生提供個性化的治療方案,還有助于提高其預(yù)后生活質(zhì)量[2]。組織活檢是乳腺癌篩查的金標準,屬于一種侵入性的檢查手段,且僅能獲取局部組織的特征信息。因此,亟須進一步挖掘一種可無創(chuàng)獲取腫瘤組織信息的檢查方法。超聲檢查、X射線攝影和磁共振成像(magnetic resonance imaging,MRI)等影像學檢查方法憑借其有效且非侵入性的優(yōu)點在臨床檢查中越來越受到重視。在辨別和區(qū)分乳腺病變時X射線攝影和超聲檢查常表現(xiàn)欠佳,特異性及敏感度有限。MRI相比X射線攝影和超聲檢查分辨率更高,可更好地識別乳腺病變及展示相關(guān)病變特征,挖掘更多客觀且豐富的信息,為檢測乳腺癌提供新的視角[3]。彌散加權(quán)成像(diffusion weighted imaging,DWI)作為一種無須依賴造影劑的MRI技術(shù)被廣泛應(yīng)用。通過利用多個低和(或)高b值的組合,一些高階DWI技術(shù)如體素內(nèi)不相干運動(intravoxel incoherent motion,IVIM)等被提出[4]。IVIM成像采用雙指數(shù)擬合,可在一次成像中分離出單位體素內(nèi)的細胞性水分子擴散運動和血流性水分子運動,獲取關(guān)于腫瘤組織特征及性質(zhì)的信息,為鑒別診斷乳腺良惡性腫瘤提供更豐富、科學的依據(jù),已成為當前最有效的技術(shù)之一。本研究旨在探討IVIM成像參數(shù)在乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)鑒別診斷及其與乳腺癌Ki-67受體表達相關(guān)性中的應(yīng)用價值。
1" 資料與方法
1.1" 一般資料
選取2022年10月至2025年1月在嘉興市第二醫(yī)院完成乳腺3.0 T MRI且手術(shù)病理結(jié)果完備的41例女性患者資料,年齡29~69歲,平均(47.95±10.84)歲。根據(jù)手術(shù)病理結(jié)果將患者分為良性組和惡性組。良性組25例患者,平均年齡(47.40±10.77)歲;惡性組16例患者,平均年齡(48.81± 2.82)歲;兩組患者的年齡差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(t=0.403,Pgt;0.05)。納入標準:①臨床(鉬靶或超聲檢查)發(fā)現(xiàn)乳腺有可疑病灶;②檢查前未進行治療;③具有明確病理診斷結(jié)果;④年齡gt;18歲。排除標準:①有MRI檢查禁忌證;②因自身原因未成功完成MRI掃描;③MRI圖像失真、偽影嚴重,影響臨床診斷。納入患者在MRI檢查前均簽署知情同意書。本研究經(jīng)嘉興市第二醫(yī)院倫理委員會審批通過(倫理審批號:嘉興二院倫審2023研第053號)。
1.2" MRI檢查方法
采用飛利浦Ingenia CX 3.0 T MRI掃描儀和16通道乳腺專用線圈進行掃描。所有患者均采用俯臥體位,雙乳自然垂直墜于專用線圈內(nèi),乳頭中心對準線圈中點,囑患者調(diào)整好姿勢,平穩(wěn)呼吸。在三平面定位掃描后,依次進行乳腺MRI相關(guān)序列掃描。具體序列及采集參數(shù):①T2加權(quán)像(T2 weighted image,T2WI)抑脂序列。重復(fù)時間(repetiton time,TR):4000.0ms;回波時間(echo time,TE):70.0ms;體素大?。?.95mm×1.14mm×5.00mm;視野(field of view,F(xiàn)OV):280mm×339mm;層厚:5.00mm;重建矩陣尺寸:432×432。②T1加權(quán)像(T1 weighted image,T1WI)序列。TR:400.0ms;TE:8.0ms;體素大?。?.95mm×1.14mm×5.0mm;FOV:280mm×339mm;層厚:5.0mm;重建矩陣尺寸:528×528。③DWI序列(b=800s/mm2)。TR:1000.0ms;TE:63.2ms;體素大小:3.00mm×3.08mm×5.00mm;FOV:280mm×341mm;層厚:5.0mm;重建矩陣尺寸:224×224。④IVIM序列:TR:1000.0ms;TE:61.2ms;體素大?。?.00mm×2.99mm×5.00mm;FOV:339mm×254mm;層厚:5.0mm;重建矩陣尺寸:224×224。⑤動態(tài)對比增強(dynamic contrast- enhanced,DCE)序列。TR:500.0ms;TE:21.0ms;體素大?。?.1mm×1.2mm×1.2mm;FOV:320mm×337mm;層厚:1.2mm;重建矩陣尺寸:400×400。通過雙管高壓注射器以0.2mmol/kg的劑量及2.5ml/s的速率注射對比劑釓噴酸葡胺(北京北陸藥業(yè)股份有限公司),然后以相同速率注射20ml生理鹽水。
1.3" MRI圖像分析
首先,將乳腺MRI檢查圖像DICOM格式數(shù)據(jù)傳入MITK-Diffusion軟件(DKFZ,v2023.04)中,分割獲取真實擴散系數(shù)(real diffusion coefficient,D)、偽擴散系數(shù)(perfusion related diffusion coefficient,D*)、血液容積分數(shù)(perfusion fraction,f)參數(shù)圖。然后結(jié)合常規(guī)MRI序列和DCE-MRI圖像對病灶進行精準定位,找到病灶最大層面勾畫感興趣區(qū)域(region of interest,ROI)。為最大限度避免測量誤差,勾畫ROI時要注意盡量包全病灶處,避開有明顯的囊變、壞死和出血區(qū)域。每個參數(shù)值均重復(fù)測量2次,取平均值。所有數(shù)據(jù)測量均由兩名3年以上MRI閱片經(jīng)驗的放射科醫(yī)生獨立分析完成,當兩者出現(xiàn)意見分歧時,共同討論協(xié)商達成一致。
1.4" 免疫組織化學染色結(jié)果判定
Ki-67陽性染色定位于細胞核,表現(xiàn)為棕黃色著色。根據(jù)2011年St Gallen會議共識,本研究將分界值設(shè)定為14%[5]。陽性≥14%為高表達,陽性lt;14%為低表達。
1.5" 統(tǒng)計學方法
采用SPSS 26.0軟件和Medcalc 22.0軟件進行統(tǒng)計學分析。計量數(shù)據(jù)均通過Shapiro-Wilk檢驗判斷是否滿足正態(tài)分布。符合正態(tài)分布的計量資料以均數(shù)±標準差(")表示,比較采用獨立樣本t檢驗。采用Pearson分析研究IVIM成像參數(shù)與Ki-67受體表達間的相關(guān)性。采用受試者操作特征曲線(receiver operating characteristic curve,ROC曲線)量化參數(shù)D、D*及f值對乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)的鑒別診斷效能。Plt;0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計學意義。
2" 結(jié)果
乳腺良性結(jié)節(jié)組25例患者中共發(fā)現(xiàn)28個良性病灶,包括6個囊腫、5個纖維腺瘤、1個導(dǎo)管內(nèi)乳頭狀瘤、3個導(dǎo)管上皮增生、4個腺病伴纖維腺瘤、7個腺病、1個脂肪瘤、1個纖維結(jié)締組織增生。惡性結(jié)節(jié)組16例患者中共發(fā)現(xiàn)17個惡性病灶,包括1個梭形細胞癌、8個導(dǎo)管原位癌、1個浸潤性小葉癌、7個浸潤性導(dǎo)管癌。根據(jù)Ki-67表達情況將惡性組患者分為Ki-67高表達組和Ki-67低表達組,其中Ki-67高表達組中有14個病灶,Ki-67低表達組中有3個病灶。MRI檢查完成后,經(jīng)過圖像后處理生成代表性的乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)的IVIM成像參數(shù)圖,見圖1及圖2。
2.1" 良性組和惡性組病灶的IVIM成像參數(shù)比較
良性組病灶的D值明顯高于惡性組,D*值明顯低于惡性組,兩組間的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(Plt;0.05);良性組病灶的f值略低于惡性組,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05),見表1。
2.2" IVIM成像參數(shù)對乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)的鑒別診斷效能
以病理診斷結(jié)果為金標準,生成IVIM成像參數(shù)D、D*及f值的ROC曲線圖,IVIM成像各參數(shù)中D值對乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)的診斷效能最佳,當最佳診斷閾值取1.14×10–3mm2/s時,曲線下面積(area under the curve,AUC)達0.870(95%CI:0.755~0.985),最大約登指數(shù)0.655,敏感度75.0%,特異性76.5%;D*值、f值閾值取相關(guān)數(shù)值時,其AUC、最大約登指數(shù)、敏感度、特異性見表2。
2.3" 乳腺癌Ki-67受體高低表達組間的IVIM成像參數(shù)比較及相關(guān)性分析
乳腺癌Ki-67高表達組的D值低于低表達組,高表達組的D*、f值均高于低表達組,IVIM各成像參數(shù)的兩組間比較差異均無統(tǒng)計學意義(Pgt;0.05),見表3。IVIM各成像參數(shù)與乳腺癌Ki-67受體表達的相關(guān)性分析:Ki-67受體表達與D值呈顯著負相關(guān),與D*、f值均未見明顯相關(guān)性,見表4。
3" 討論
3.1" IVIM成像參數(shù)對乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)的鑒別診斷價值
本研究發(fā)現(xiàn)良性組的D值明顯高于惡性組,惡性組的D*值明顯高于良性組,良惡性組之間差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義,說明IVIM成像參數(shù)有助于乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)的鑒別診斷。這主要考慮惡性細胞的增殖明顯,相鄰細胞之間的排列緊湊,限制水分子擴散運動的自由。此結(jié)果與李俊等[6]、Mürtz等[7]的結(jié)果相似。IVIM成像中參數(shù)f主要與血液微循環(huán)灌注相關(guān),可間接反饋組織中新生血管的信息。本研究顯示f值在乳腺惡性結(jié)節(jié)組中略高,但f值兩組比較差異無統(tǒng)計學意義,與阮惠萍等[8]研究結(jié)果一致,而與王志遠等[9]研究結(jié)果相悖。王志遠等[9]認為f值在兩組間的差異有統(tǒng)計學意義。推測結(jié)果出現(xiàn)分歧的原因,可能與b值的選擇或不同設(shè)備間的差異有關(guān)。采用ROC量化各參數(shù)的鑒別診斷性能,當D值取最佳診斷閾值1.14×10–3mm2/s時,AUC為0.870,敏感度為75.0%,特異性最高(76.5%);D*值的鑒別診斷效能僅次于D值,當D*值取最佳診斷閾值7.50×10–3mm2/s時,AUC為0.789,特異性為60.7%,敏感度最高(88.2%);f值的鑒別診斷效能最差,遠不及D、D*值;當f值取閾值9.46%時,AUC為0.533,敏感度為71.4%,特異性為30.4%。與王磊等[10]研究結(jié)果相似,可進一步確認D值的鑒別診斷效能最佳。相比f、D*值,D值僅單純反映細胞性水分子擴散運動情況,不受血流性水分子運動的干擾,因而獲得的診斷效能最佳[11-12]。這一結(jié)論與以往學者的結(jié)論一致[13-14]。
3.2" IVIM成像參數(shù)在乳腺癌Ki-67受體表達中的鑒別診斷價值
Ki-67可用作評價乳腺惡性腫瘤細胞的增殖能力[15]。本研究指出乳腺癌Ki-67受體高表達組的D值低于低表達組,究其原因:①可能是Ki-67高表達組的惡性細胞增殖能力較強,相鄰細胞之間的排列緊湊,限制水分子擴散運動的自由;②可能是高表達組的細胞膜通透性降低,單位體素內(nèi)的水分子活動受阻。D值在兩組間差異無統(tǒng)計學意義。參數(shù)D*、f值在Ki-67受體高表達組中均高于低表達組,差異均無統(tǒng)計學意義。喬亞麗等[16]研究顯示D、f及D*值在乳腺癌Ki-67高低表達組間的差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義。有研究者猜測可重復(fù)性的缺乏可能是導(dǎo)致這一結(jié)果的關(guān)鍵因素[17]??紤]本研究主要受樣本量的影響。本研究IVIM成像參數(shù)與乳腺癌Ki-67受體表達的相關(guān)性分析表明Ki-67受體表達與D值之間呈顯著負相關(guān),與D*、f值之間均未見明顯相關(guān)性,認為得到的D值越低,乳腺病變惡性的可能性就越大,相應(yīng)的Ki-67指數(shù)可能越高。此結(jié)果與Feng等[18]研究結(jié)果相似。因此,D值可作為優(yōu)化治療方案及提高預(yù)后生活質(zhì)量的科學依據(jù)。
3.3" 局限性
本研究存在一定局限性和不足:首先,本研究的樣本量較小,需進一步擴大樣本量來支撐目前已有的結(jié)論,以便在推進乳腺癌診療及改善預(yù)后方面取得實質(zhì)性進步;其次,IVIM模型的計算與預(yù)先設(shè)定的b值大小有關(guān)。然而目前國內(nèi)外關(guān)于b值的設(shè)定標準尚未統(tǒng)一,下一步需進一步研究優(yōu)化b值的設(shè)定對IVIM成像參數(shù)測量結(jié)果的影響。
綜上,IVIM成像各參數(shù)中D、D*值在乳腺良惡性結(jié)節(jié)鑒別診斷中均具有較大臨床價值,其中D值的鑒別診斷效能最佳,與乳腺癌Ki-67受體表達之間呈顯著負相關(guān),可為廣大乳腺病變患者的早期診斷、個性化治療及預(yù)后改善提供準確且科學的依據(jù)。
利益沖突:所有作者均聲明不存在利益沖突。
[參考文獻]
[1]"" OLFATBAKHSH A, HEIDARI L, OMIDI Z, et al. Long-term survival and prognostic factors of breast cancer[J]. Arch Iran Med, 2022, 25 (9): 609–616.
[2]"" RAMAMOORTHI G, KODUMUDI K, GALLEN C, "et al. Disseminated cancer cells in breast cancer: Mechanism of dissemination and dormancy and emerging insights on therapeutic opportunities[J]. Semin Cancer Biol, 2021, 78: 78–89.
[3]"" JULIANO M, SAMREEN N, CHACKO C, et al. Clinical role of abbreviated and ultrafast MRI in breast imaging[J]. Br J Radiol, 2024, 97(1161): 1511–1516.
[4]"" LE BIHAN D, BRETON E, LALLEMAND D, et al. MR imaging of intravoxel incoherent motions: Application to diffusion and perfusion in neurologic disorders[J]. Radiology, 1986, 161(2): 401–407.
[5]"" GOLDHIRSCH A, WOOD W C, COATES A S, et al. Strategies for subtypes—dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: Highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011[J]. Ann Oncol, 2011, 22 (8): 1736–1747.
[6]"" 李俊, 蔡小麗, 吳奇川, 等. 全容積IVIM直方圖分析對乳腺良惡性病變的影響[J]. 中國CT和MRI雜志, 2024, 22(3): 82–85.
[7]"" MüRTZ P, TSESARSKIY M, SPRINKART A M, et al. Simplified intravoxel incoherent motion DWI for differentiating malignant from benign breast lesions[J]. Eur Radiol Exp, 2022, 6(1): 48.
[8]"" 阮惠萍, 何慕真. 彌散加權(quán)成像模型鑒別乳腺良惡性病變[J]. 中國醫(yī)學影像技術(shù), 2022, 38 (1): 78–82.
[9]"" 王志遠, 吳海龍, 李淑豪, 等. IVIM-DWI與DCE-MRI定量參數(shù)鑒別乳腺良惡性腫瘤的對照研究[J]. 放射學實踐, 2021, 36(12): 1514–1519.
[10] 王磊, 趙凡, 朱來敏, 等. 多模態(tài)定量磁共振成像對乳腺良惡性病變的診斷價值[J]. 臨床放射學雜志, 2023, 42(10): 1578–1583.
[11] HE M, RUAN H, MA M, et al. Application of diffusion weighted imaging techniques for differentiating benign and malignant breast lesions[J]. Front Oncol, 2021, 11: 694634.
[12] CHEN K, YU C, PAN J, et al. Prediction of the Nottingham prognostic index and molecular subtypes of breast cancer through multimodal magnetic resonance imaging[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2024, 108: 168–175.
[13] MA W, MAO J, WANG T, et al. Distinguishing between benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion weighted imaging and intravoxel incoherent motion: A systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Eur J Radiol, 2021, 141: 109809.
[14] XU W, ZHENG B, LI H. Identification of the benignity and malignancy of BI-RADS 4 breast lesions based on a combined quantitative model of dynamic contrast- enhanced MRI and intravoxel incoherent motion[J]. Tomography, 2022, 8(6): 2676–2686.
[15] FINKELMAN B S, ZHANG H, HICKS D G, et al. The evolution of Ki-67 and breast carcinoma: Past observations, present directions, and future considerations[J]. Cancers (Basel), 2023, 15 (3): 808.
[16] 喬亞麗, 呂宛平. 乳腺癌MRI IVIM-DWI參數(shù)與p53、Ki-67表達狀態(tài)的相關(guān)性及其診斷價值[J]. 實用癌癥雜志, 2023, 38(12): 2059–2062.
[17] ANDREOU A, KOH D M, COLLINS D J, et al. Measurement reproducibility of perfusion fraction and pseudodiffusion coefficient derived by intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MR imaging in normal liver and metastases[J]. Eur Radiol, 2013, 23(2): 428–434.
[18] FENG W, GAO Y, LU X R, et al. Correlation between molecular prognostic factors and magnetic resonance imaging intravoxel incoherent motion histogram parameters in breast cancer[J]. Magn Reson Imaging, 2022, 85: 262–270.
(收稿日期:2025–02–21)
(修回日期:2025–07–08)
基金項目:浙江省嘉興市民生科技創(chuàng)新研究項目(2023AD31037)
通信作者:劉虎,電子信箱:sxfyasdf_1@163.com