1. Hortobagyi, GN . Multidisciplinary management of advanced primary and metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 1994; 74: 416–423.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline2. Bouzón, A, Iglesias, Á, Acea, A, et al. Evaluation of MRI Accuracy after primary systemic therapy in breast cancer patients considering tumor biology: optimizing the surgical planning. Radiol Oncol 2019; 53: 171–177.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline3. Vlastos, G, Mirza, NQ, Lenert, JT, et al. The feasibility of minimally invasive surgery for stage IIA, IIB, and IIIA breast carcinoma patients after tumor downstaging with induction chemotherapy. Cancer 2000; 88: 1417–1424.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline4. Scholl, SM, Fourquet, A, Asselain, B, et al. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in premenopausal patients with tumours considered too large for breast conserving surgery: preliminary results of a randomized trial: S6. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A: 645–652.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI5. Fisher, B, Bryant, J, Wolmark, N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2672–2685.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI6. Mauriac, L, MacGrogan, G, Avril, A, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast carcinoma larger than 3 cm: a unicentre randomized trial with a 124-month median follow-up. Institut Bergonié Bordeaux Groupe Sein (IBBGS). Am Oncol 1999; 10: 47–52.
Google Scholar7. Bear, HD, Anderson, S, Smith, RE, et al. Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 2019–2027.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI8. Hennigs, A, Riedel, F, Marmé, F, et al. Changes in chemotherapy usage and outcome of early breast cancer patients in the last decade. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2016; 160: 491–499.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline9. Patten, DK, Zacharioudakis, KE, Chauhan, H, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer: are the current false negative rates acceptable? Breast 2015; 24: 318–320.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline10. Del Turco, MR, Ponti, A, Bick, U, et al. Quality indicators in breast cancer care. Eur J Cancer 2010; 46: 2344–2356.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline11. Balu-Maestro, C, Chapellier, C, Bleuse, A, et al. Imaging in evaluation of response to neoadjuvant breast cancer treatment benefits of MRI. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002; 72: 145–152.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI12. Yuan, Y, Chen, XS, Liu, SY, et al. Accuracy of MRI in prediction of pathologic complete remission in breast cancer after preoperative therapy: a meta-analysis. Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195: 260–268.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI13. Lobbes, MB, Prevos, R, Smidt, M, et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in assessing residual disease and pathologic complete response in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review. Insights Imaging 2013; 4: 163–175.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline14. Marinovich, ML, Houssami, N, Macaskill, P, et al. Meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging in detecting residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2013; 105: 321–333.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline15. De Los Santos, JF, Cantor, A, Amos, KD, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging as a predictor of pathologic response in patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment for operable breast cancer. Translational Breast Cancer Research Consortium trial 017. Cancer 2013; 119: 1776–1783.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline16. Park, S, Yoon, JH, Sohn, J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy can accurately discriminate between no residual carcinoma and residual ductal carcinoma in situ in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0149347.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline17. Choi, WJ, Kim, HH, Cha, JH, et al. Complete response on MR imaging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients: factors of radiologic-pathologic discordance. Eur J Radiol 2019; 118: 114–121.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline18. Irwig, L, Bennetts, A. Quality of life after breast conservation or mastectomy: a systematic review. Aust N Z J Surg 1997; 67: 750–754.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline19. Feliciano, Y, Mamtani, A, Morrow, M, et al. Do calcifications seen on mammography after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer always need to be excised? Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 24: 1492–1498.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline20. Förnvik, D, Zackrisson, S, Ljungberg, O, et al. Breast tomosynthesis: accuracy of tumor measurement compared with digital mammography and ultrasonography. Acta Radiol 2010; 51: 240–247.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI21. Hakim, CM, Chough, DM, Ganott, MA, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis in the diagnostic environment: a subjective side-by-side review. Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195: W172–W176.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI22. Park, JM, Franken, EA, Garg, M, et al. Breast tomosynthesis: present considerations and future applications. Radiographics 2007; 27(Suppl 1): S231–S240.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline23. Poplack, SP, Tosteson, TD, Kogel, CA, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol 2007; 189: 616–623.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI24. Kinoshita, T, Hojo, T, et al. (2012) Usefulness of adjunction of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) to full-field digital mammography (FFDM) in evaluation of pathological response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for breast cancer, Breast Imaging. Springer, p. 354–361.
Google Scholar25. Park, J, Chae, EY, Cha, JH, et al. Comparison of mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, automated breast ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging in evaluation of residual tumor after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Radiol 2018; 108: 261–268.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline26. Park, CK, Jung, WH, Koo, JS. Pathologic evaluation of breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. J Pathol Transl Med 2016; 50: 173–180.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline27. Kim, YS, Chang, JM, Moon, HG, et al. Residual mammographic microcalcifications and enhancing lesions on MRI after neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy for locally advanced breast Cancer: correlation with histopathologic residual tumor size. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23: 1135–1142.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline28. Moskovic, EC, Mansi, JL, King, DM, et al. Mammography in the assessment of response to medical treatment of large primary breast cancer. Clin Radiol 1993; 47: 339–344.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline29. Weiss, A, Lee, KC, Romero, Y, et al. Calcifications on mammogram do not correlate with tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21: 3310–3316.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline30. Feliciano, Y, Mamtani, A, Morrow, M, et al. Do calcifications seen on mammography after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer always need to be excised? Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 24: 1492–1498.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline31. Marinovich, ML, Macaskill, P, Irwig, L, et al. Agreement between MRI and pathologic breast tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and comparison with alternative tests: individual patient data meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 2015; 15: 662.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline32. Kim, SY, Cho, N, Park, IA, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI for evaluating residual tumor size after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiology 2018; 289: 327–334.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline33. Padhani, AR, Hayes, C, Assersohn, L, et al. Prediction of clinicopathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy at contrast-enhanced MR imaging: initial clinical results. Radiology 2006; 239: 361–374.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI34. Mennella, S, Garlaschi, A, Paparo, F, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer: factors affecting the accuracy of preoperative lesion sizing. Acta Radiol 2015; 56: 260–268.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI35. Millet, I, Pages, E, Hoa, D, et al. Pearls and pitfalls in breast MRI. Br J Radiol 2012; 85: 197–207.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI36. Eisenhauer, EA, Therasse, P, Bogaerts, J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 228–247.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI