Full Text

Turn on search term navigation

© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.

Abstract

Simple Summary

Tumor heterogeneity influences tumor progression and response to therapy, introducing a significant challenge in the treatment of breast cancer. We employed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to characterize tumor heterogeneity over time in response to treatment in a mouse model of HER2+ breast cancer. In a two-part approach, we first used quantitative MRI to identify unique subregions of the tumor (i.e., “tumor habitats”, resolving intratumoral heterogeneity), then used the habitats to stratify tumors prior to treatment into two distinct “tumor imaging phenotypes” (resolving intertumoral heterogeneity). The tumor phenotypes exhibited differential response to treatments, suggesting that baseline phenotypes can predict therapy response. Additionally, there were significant correlations between the imaging habitats and histological measures of vascular maturation, hypoxia, and macrophage infiltration, lending ex vivo biological validation to the in vivo imaging habitats. Application of these techniques in the clinical setting could improve understanding of an individual patient’s tumor pathology and potential therapeutic sensitivity.

Abstract

This study identifies physiological habitats using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to elucidate intertumoral differences and characterize microenvironmental response to targeted and cytotoxic therapy. BT-474 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2+) breast tumors were imaged before and during treatment (trastuzumab, paclitaxel) with diffusion-weighted MRI and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI to measure tumor cellularity and vascularity, respectively. Tumors were stained for anti-CD31, anti-ɑSMA, anti-CD45, anti-F4/80, anti-pimonidazole, and H&E. MRI data was clustered to identify and label each habitat in terms of vascularity and cellularity. Pre-treatment habitat composition was used stratify tumors into two “tumor imaging phenotypes” (Type 1, Type 2). Type 1 tumors showed significantly higher percent tumor volume of the high-vascularity high-cellularity (HV-HC) habitat compared to Type 2 tumors, and significantly lower volume of low-vascularity high-cellularity (LV-HC) and low-vascularity low-cellularity (LV-LC) habitats. Tumor phenotypes showed significant differences in treatment response, in both changes in tumor volume and physiological composition. Significant positive correlations were found between histological stains and tumor habitats. These findings suggest that the differential baseline imaging phenotypes can predict response to therapy. Specifically, the Type 1 phenotype indicates increased sensitivity to targeted or cytotoxic therapy compared to Type 2 tumors.

Details

Title
Quantifying Tumor Heterogeneity via MRI Habitats to Characterize Microenvironmental Alterations in HER2+ Breast Cancer
Author
Kazerouni, Anum S 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; HormuthII, David A 2   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Davis, Tessa 3 ; Bloom, Meghan J 3 ; Mounho, Sarah 3 ; Rahman, Gibraan 3 ; Virostko, John 4   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Yankeelov, Thomas E 5   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Sorace, Anna G 6   VIAFID ORCID Logo 

 Department of Radiology, The University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98104, USA; [email protected] 
 Oden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; [email protected]; Livestrong Cancer Institutes, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; [email protected] 
 Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; [email protected] (T.D.); [email protected] (M.J.B.); [email protected] (S.M.); [email protected] (G.R.) 
 Livestrong Cancer Institutes, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; [email protected]; Department of Diagnostic Medicine, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Department of Oncology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA 
 Oden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; [email protected]; Livestrong Cancer Institutes, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; [email protected]; Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; [email protected] (T.D.); [email protected] (M.J.B.); [email protected] (S.M.); [email protected] (G.R.); Department of Diagnostic Medicine, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Department of Oncology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Department of Imaging Physics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, The University of Texas, Houston, TX 77030, USA 
 Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA; Department of Radiology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA; O’Neal Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA 
First page
1837
Publication year
2022
Publication date
2022
Publisher
MDPI AG
e-ISSN
20726694
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
ProQuest document ID
2649006501
Copyright
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.