The Role of Ultrasound Features in Predicting the Breast Cancer Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.

Background Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has become the standard of care for locally advanced breast cancer. This study investigates whether baseline ultrasound features can predict complete pathological response (pCR) after NACT. Methods This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, with a waiver of informed consent. Records of female patients aged over 18 years with locally advanced breast cancer treated with NACT from 2018 to 2020 were reviewed. Baseline ultrasound parameters were assessed, including posterior effect, echo pattern, margin, and maximum lesion diameter. Tumor grade and immunophenotype were documented from the core biopsy. pCR was defined as the absence of invasive residual disease in the breast and axilla. Univariate and multivariate analyses assessed the association between ultrasound features and pathological response. Results A total of 110 breast cancer cases were analyzed: 36 (32.7%) were estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER-2) negative, 49 (44.5%) were HER-2 positive, and 25 (22.7%) were triple-negative (TN). A pCR was achieved in 20 (18%) of cancers. Lesion diameter was significantly different between pCR and non-pCR groups, 28.5 ± 12 mm versus 39 ± 18 mm, respectively, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.7, a confidence interval (CI) of 0.55-0.81, and a p-value of 0.01. No significant association was observed between ultrasound features, tumor grade, and immunophenotype with pCR. Conclusion Ultrasound features could not predict pCR. A smaller tumor diameter was the only significant factor associated with pCR. Further prospective studies combining imaging features from different modalities are needed to explore the potential of varying imaging features in predicting post-NACT pathological response more comprehensively.

Imaging Findings of Ovarian Vein Thrombosis.

Ovarian vein thrombosis (OVT) is an uncommon condition that occurs mainly in the peripartum period. Hyper-coagulable conditions have been reported to cause OVT outside the peripartum period. The clinical presentation is usually nonspecific pain, but it can be asymptomatic in patients with underlying malignancy. Imaging plays an important role in diagnosis. Ultrasound is the initial imaging modality, but it is operator-dependent and has limited sensitivity. Computed tomography (CT) is the most commonly used modality for diagnosis. CT can show the luminal filling defect within the thrombosed vein and assess the extension of the thrombosis. MRI can show the thrombosed vein as a filling defect on post-contrast images; also, diffusion-weighted images may help in the diagnosis. Complications include extension into the inferior vena cava or renal veins. Pulmonary embolism is the most serious complication. Treatment includes anticoagulation plus antibiotics. Early diagnosis is essential to prevent complications.

History of metaphoric signs in radiology.

PURPOSE: To survey the nearly 100 year history of metaphoric sign naming in radiology describing the pace of their overall accumulation in the radiology canon, their specific rates of growth by modality and subspecialty and the characteristics of the referents to which the signs are attached. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive list of metaphoric signs was compiled from a search of articles in several major English language radiology journals, from a roster compiled in a monograph on the subject published in 1984 and from a search of several databases to find signs published in the first half of the 20th century. RESULTS: The growth of radiological metaphorical signs naming was slow for several decades after the first one was published in 1918. It then increased rapidly until the 1980s encompassing all modalities and subspecialties. Recently the practice has shown a marked and steady decline. CONCLUSION: Metaphoric sign naming was a frequently reported contribution to the radiological literature in the second half of the 20th century corresponding with Radiology's growth as a descriptive discipline. Its decline since then may be a consequence of Radiology's evolution into a more analytic, data-driven field of inquiry.