Detection of Treatment Response in Triple‐Negative Breast Tumors to Paclitaxel Using MRI Cell Size Imaging

Breast cancer treatment response evaluation using the response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST) guidelines, based on tumor volume changes, has limitations, prompting interest in novel imaging markers for accurate therapeutic effect determination.To use MRI-measured cell size as a new imaging biomarker for assessing chemotherapy response in breast cancer.Longitudinal; animal model.Triple-negative human breast cancer cell (MDA-MB-231) pellets (4 groups, n = 7) treated with dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) or 10 nM of paclitaxel for 24, 48, and 96 hours, and 29 mice with MDA-MB-231 tumors in right hind limbs treated with paclitaxel (n = 16) or DMSO (n = 13) twice weekly for 3 weeks.Oscillating gradient spin echo and pulsed gradient spin echo sequences at 4.7 T.MDA-MB-231 cells were analyzed using flowcytometry and light microscopy to assess cell cycle phases and cell size distribution. MDA-MB-231 cell pellets were MR imaged. Mice were imaged weekly, with 9, 6, and 14 being sacrificed for histology after MRI at weeks 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Microstructural parameters of tumors/cell pellets were derived by fitting diffusion MRI data to a biophysical model.One-way ANOVA compared cell sizes and MR-derived parameters between treated and control samples. Repeated measures 2-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-tests compared temporal changes in MR-derived parameters. A P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.In vitro experiments showed that the mean MR-derived cell sizes of paclitaxel-treated cells increased significantly with a 24-hours treatment and decreased (P = 0.06) with a 96-hour treatment. For in vivo xenograft experiments, the paclitaxel-treated tumors showed significant decreases in cell size at later weeks. MRI observations were supported by flowcytometry, light microscopy, and histology.MR-derived cell size may characterize the cell shrinkage during treatment-induced apoptosis, and may potentially provide new insights into the assessment of therapeutic response.2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 4.