Published in:
Open Access 01-12-2023 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Research
Application of triple evaluation method in predicting the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer
Published in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology | Issue 1/2023
Login to get accessAbstract
Objective
To analyze the factors related to the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer and find appropriate evaluation methods for evaluating the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy
Methods
A total of 143 patients with breast cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy at Baotou Cancer Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The chemotherapy regimen was mainly paclitaxel combined with carboplatin for 1 week, docetaxel combined with carboplatin for 3 weeks, and was replaced with epirubicin combined with cyclophosphamide after evaluation of disease progression. All HER2-positive patients were treated with simultaneous targeted therapy, including trastuzumab single-target therapy and trastuzumab combined with pertuzumab double-target therapy. Combined with physical examination, color Doppler ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a systematic evaluation system was initially established—the “triple evaluation method.” A baseline evaluation was conducted before treatment. The efficacy was evaluated by physical examination and color Doppler every cycle, and the efficacy was evaluated by physical examination, color Doppler, and MRI every two cycles.
Results
The increase in ultrasonic blood flow after treatment could affect the efficacy of monitoring. The presence of two preoperative time–signal intensity curves is a therapeutically effective protective factor for inflow. The triple evaluation determined by physical examination, color Doppler ultrasound, and MRI in determining clinical efficacy is consistent with the effectiveness of the pathological gold standard.
Conclusion
The therapeutic effect of neoadjuvant therapy can be better evaluated by combining clinical physical examination, color ultrasound, and nuclear magnetic resonance evaluation. The three methods complement each other to avoid the insufficient evaluation of a single method, which is convenient for most prefecty-level hospitals. Additionally, this method is simple, feasible, and suitable for promotion.