4 research outputs found
Efficacy of Breast Ultrasonography for Detection of Local, Regional, and Contralateral Recurrence of Breast Cancer
Purpose: Breast uttrasonography (US) is not recommended for recurrence monitoring after breast cancer surgery due to the lack of evidence for its advantage. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of US for detecting local recurrence (LR), regional recurrence (RR) and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) in breast cancer patients during follow-up. Methods: The medical records of 5,833 breast cancer patients who underwent breast cancer surgery between January 2003 and December 2009 were reviewed retrospectively. Physical examination (PE), mammography (MMG), and US were done routinely to detect recurrences. Detection rate for locoregional and contralateral recurrence was compared between the three modalities. Results: During the follow-up period, 125 LR, 46 RR, 83 CBC, and 29 synchronous local and regional recurrences developed in 245 patients among the study population of 5,833 breast cancer patients. Median time to recurrence was 34.7 months. The recurrence detection rate was 51.9%, 43.5%, and 90.1% for PE, MMG, and US, respectively. Mean size of the recurrent lesions detected by US (1.57 cm) was smaller than that of PE (2.69 cm) and MMG (2.03 cm) (p=0.002). Conclusion: Breast US had higher recurrence detection rate for LA, RR, and CBC than PE or MMG after breast cancer surgery.
μ λ°©μμ 2007λ
μ°λ¦¬λλΌ μ¬μ± μ λ°μλ₯ 2μ(15.1%), λ°μ νμ μλ 11,606λͺ
μ μ°¨μ§νκ³ μκ³ , μ°κ° 6,6%μ λμ λ°μλ₯ μ μ¦κ°λ₯Ό 보μ΄κ³ μλ€.(1) λν μ§λ 10λ
κ° κ΅λ΄μ μ λ°©μ μΉλ£ μ±μ λ μ§μμ μΌλ‘ κ°μ λμ΄ 5λ
μμ‘΄μ¨μ 77.9%μμ 89.5%λ‘
11.5% μ¦κ°νμλ€. μ΄λ¬ν μ λ³λ₯ μ μ¦κ°μ μ₯κΈ° μμ‘΄μ¨μ ν₯μμΌλ‘ μΈν΄ 1999λ
μ΄ν 9λ
λμ μ λ³μ μλ 68,136λͺ
(11.2%)μΌλ‘ λΉ λ₯΄κ² μ¦κ°νκ³ μλ€.(1,2) μ΄λ¬ν μ λ°©μ λ°μλ₯ μ¦κ°μ μ¬λ§λ₯ κ°μ λ° μ λ°©μ μμ ν μ₯κΈ°μμ‘΄μμ μ¦κ°μ λ°λΌ λμΈ‘ μ λ°© λ΄ μ¬λ°μ ν¬ν¨ν κ΅μμ¬λ°κ³Ό λ°λμΈ‘ μ λ°©μμ΄ λ°μνλ νμμ λΉλκ° μ΅κ·Ό μ¦κ°νκ³ μλ€.
National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project(NSABP) B-06μ κ²½μ° 20λ
μ μΆμ κ΄μ°°κΈ°κ° λμ 14.3%μ λμΈ‘ μ λ°© μ¬λ°(ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence)μ λ³΄κ³ νμκ³ ,(3) 10λ
μ μΆμ κΈ°κ° λμ λ¨λ
κ΅μ-ꡬμ μ¬λ°(locoregional recurrence)μ 12.4%, 4κ°μ μ΄λ΄ μ μ μ¬λ°μ λλ°ν κ΅μ-ꡬμ μ¬λ°μ 19.8% λ³΄κ³ λμλ€.(4) μ λ°©μμΌλ‘ μΉλ£λ°μ νμμμ λ°λμΈ‘ μ λ°©μ(contralateral breast cancer)μ΄ μκΈΈ νλ₯ μ 2-11%λ‘ μ λ°©μμ κ±Έλ¦¬μ§ μμ μ¬μ±μ λΉν΄ 2-6λ°°μ λμ μνλλ₯Ό κ°μ§λ€.(5)
2008λ
νκ΅μ λ°©μνν μ λ°©μ μ§λ£κΆκ³ μμ λΉλ‘―νμ¬ μꡬμ λ€μν μ λ°©μ μ§λ£κΆκ³ μμμλ κ΅μ, ꡬμ, κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ λ°λμΈ‘ μ λ°©μ μ¬λ°μ μ§λ¨ν¨μ μμ΄μ 1λ
λ§λ€μ μΆμ κ΄μ°°κ³Ό ν¨κ» μ 방촬μμ μ μννλ κ²μ κΆκ³ νκ³ μλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ μ λ°©μ΄μνλ μ λ°© μ기곡λͺ
μμ λ±μ μΆκ°μ μμκ²μ¬μ ν¨μ©μ μμ§ λΆνμ€νμ¬ κ³ μν νμμμ μ νμ μΌλ‘ μννλ κ²μ κΆνκ³ μλ€.(6-11)μ΅κ·Ό μ¬λ¬ κ΅λ΄μΈμ μ°κ΅¬μμ μ λ°©μ μμ ν κ΅μμ¬λ°μ΄λ μ‘μλΆ λ¦Όνμ μ¬λ°μ μ‘°κΈ° λ°κ²¬νλ λ° μμ΄ μ λ°©μ΄μνμ μ μ¬μ ν¨μ©μ±μ΄ λ³΄κ³ λκ³ μλ€.(12-15) μ΄μ λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μμλ μ λ°©μμ κ΅μ, ꡬμ, κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ λ°λμΈ‘ μ λ°©μ μ¬λ°μ μ§λ¨νλ λ° μμ΄μ μ λ°©
μ΄μνμ μ μ©μ±μ λ¨μΌκΈ°κ΄μμ μμ λ°κ³ μΆμ κ΄μ°°λ°μ νκ΅μΈ μ λ°©μ νμκ΅°μμ λΆμν΄λ³΄κ³ μ νμλ€.λ³Έ λ
Όλ¬Έμ 2010λ
λ μ λΆ(κ΅μ‘κ³ΌνκΈ°μ λΆ)μ μ¬μμΌλ‘ νκ΅μ°κ΅¬μ¬λ¨μ κΈ°μ΄
μ°κ΅¬μ¬μ
μ§μμ λ°μ μνλ κ²μ(2010-0004148).Kelly KM, 2010, EUR RADIOL, V20, P2557, DOI 10.1007/s00330-010-1844-1Kim HJ, 2010, ANN SURG ONCOL, V17, P2670, DOI 10.1245/s10434-010-1087-zJung KW, 2010, J KOREAN MED SCI, V25, P1113, DOI 10.3346/jkms.2010.25.8.1113Aebi S, 2010, ANN ONCOL, V21, pv9, DOI 10.1093/annonc/mdq159Lehman CD, 2009, J NATL COMPR CANC NE, V7, P1109Houssami N, 2009, ANN ONCOL, V20, P1505, DOI 10.1093/annonc/mdp037Moon HJ, 2009, RADIOLOGY, V252, P673, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2523081977Yarnold J, 2009, CLIN ONCOL-UK, V21, P159, DOI 10.1016/j.clon.2008.12.008Kim MJ, 2009, AM J ROENTGENOL, V192, P221, DOI 10.2214/AJR.07.4048Montgomery DA, 2007, BRIT J CANCER, V96, P1802, DOI 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603815Yilmaz MH, 2007, DIAGN INTERV RADIOL, V13, P13Khatcheressian JL, 2006, J CLIN ONCOL, V24, P5091, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.8575Shin JH, 2005, J ULTRAS MED, V24, P643Taghian A, 2004, J CLIN ONCOL, V22, P4247, DOI 10.1200/JCO.2004.01.042Ciatto S, 2004, EUR J CANCER, V40, P1496, DOI 10.1016/j.ejca.2004.03.010Fisher B, 2002, NEW ENGL J MED, V347, P1233KIM SH, 2000, J KOREAN RADIOL SOC, V42, P1009Chen Y, 1999, CANCER EPIDEM BIOMAR, V8, P855GORDON PB, 1995, CANCER, V76, P626GIUSEPPETTI GM, 1989, RADIOL MED, V78, P339*NAT COMPR CANC NE, NCCN CLIN PRACT GUID*AM COLL RAD, ACR BREAST IM REP DA*NAT CANC INF CTR, CANC STAT*KOR BREAST CANC S, 3 BREAST CANC MAN RE
Pathologic correlation to internal echogenicity of breast fibroadenoma
μνκ³Ό/μμ¬[νκΈ]
μ λ°©μ¬μ μ μ’
μ μ΄μνμ μ νμ μΌλ‘ λΆλλ¬μ΄ κ²½κ³μ λμ λλ μν μ’
κ΄΄λ‘ κ· μΌν μ€λ± λλ μ μμ½λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ©° μμΈ‘μ± μΈ‘λ©΄κ΅΄μ μμ, μμ κ²½κ³λΆμ νλ©΄μμμ¦κ° λ±μ μ견μ λλ°νλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ μ’
κ΄΄μ λͺ¨μ΅μ΄ λΆμ½μμ΄κ±°λ λ³μ°μ΄ λΆκ·μΉνκ±°λ κ³ μμ½μ΄κ±°λ μ€λ±μμ½, λΆκ· λ±ν λ΄λΆμμ½ λ±μ λΉμ νμ ννλ λλ¬Όμ§ μμΌλ©° μ΄λ¬ν λΉμ νμ μ¬μ μ μ’
μ μ΄μνμ μ
μ± μ’
κ΄΄μμ κ°λ³μ΄ μ΄λ ΅λ€.
μ‘°μ§λ³λ¦¬νμ μΌλ‘ μ¬μ μ μ’
μ κΈ°μ§μ‘°μ§κ³Ό μ μ‘°μ§μΌλ‘ μ΄λ£¨μ΄μ ΈμμΌλ©° μ΄λ€μ μλμ λΉμ¨κ³Ό κΈ°μ§μ‘°μ§μ μΈν¬λ°μ§λμ λ°λΌ λ€μν νννμ λ³μ΄κ° μλ€. λ°λΌμ μ΄λ¬ν μ‘°μ§λ³λ¦¬νμ λ€μμ±μ΄ λΉμ νμ μ΄μν μ견μ μμΈμ΄ λ μ μμ κ²μ΄λ€. λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬λ μ λ°©μ¬μ μ μ’
μ μ’
κ΄΄λ΄λΆ μ΄μν μ견과 λ³λ¦¬νμ μ견μ μ°κ΄μ±μ μ°κ΅¬ν¨μΌλ‘μ¨ λΉμ νμ μ΄μν μ견μ μμΈμ μ΄ν΄νκ³ μ νμλ€.
1995λ
1μλΆν° 1997λ
4μκΉμ§ λ³λ¦¬νμ μΌλ‘ νμ§λ μ λ°©μ¬μ μ μ’
νμ 81λͺ
μ 91λ³μλ₯Ό λμμΌλ‘ νμλ€. λͺ¨λ μμμ μ΄μν μ¬μ§μ μ’
κ΄΄μ λ΄λΆμ μ½ κ°λ, λ΄λΆμμ½ κ· λ±μ±, κ²©λ§ μ 무, μΈ‘λ©΄ κ΅΄μ μμ, νλ©΄μμ½ λ±μ λΆμνκ³ μ‘°μ§ μ¬λΌμ΄λλ₯Ό κ΄μ°°νμ¬ μ‘°μ§ν, νν, νΌλ§ μ 무, λκ΄ νμ₯ μ 무, μνν μ 무, μ¬μ ν, μ΄μ체ν, νκ΄ λΆν¬ μ λλ₯Ό λΆμνμλ€. μ’
κ΄΄λ΄λΆ μ΄μν μ견과 λ³λ¦¬νμ μ견μ κ° νλͺ©κ°μ μ΄λ ν μ°κ΄κ΄κ³κ° μλμ§λ₯Ό μ΄ν΄λ³΄κ³ λ€μκ³Ό κ°μ κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό μ»μλ€.
1. νκ΄ λΆν¬κ° λ§μμλ‘ κ³ μμ½λ₯Ό 보μμΌλ©° (p=0.006) κΈ°μ§ μ¬μ νκ° λ§μμλ‘ μ μμ½λ₯Ό 보μκ³ (p=0.035) μ΄μ체νκ° λ§μμλ‘ μ μμ½λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ κ²½ν₯μ΄ μμλ€(p=0.087).
2. νκ΄ λΆν¬κ° λ§μμλ‘ λΆκ· λ±ν λ΄λΆμμ½λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ κ²½ν₯μ΄ μμκ³ (p=0.222) κΈ°μ§ μ¬μ νκ° λ§μμλ‘ κ· λ±ν λ΄λΆμμ½λ₯Ό 보μ΄λ κ²½ν₯μ΄ μμλ€ (p=0.777).
3. νκ΄ λΆν¬κ° λ§μμλ‘ νλ©΄μμμ¦κ°μ λνλ΄λ κ²½ν₯μ΄ μμμΌλ(p=0.378) ν΅κ³νμ μΌλ‘ μ μνμ§λ μμλ€.
4. μ’
κ΄΄λ΄λΆμ 격λ§μ΄ μλ κ²½μ°κ° λ§μμΌλ©°(75.5%) μ΄μ체νκ° λ§μμλ‘ κ²©λ§μ΄ λ§μ΄ λνλ¬λ€(p=0.049).
5. νΌλ§μ΄ μκ±°λ μμ νΌλ§μ΄ μλ κ²½μ° μΈ‘λ©΄κ΅΄μ μ΄ λνλμ§ μλ κ²½μ°κ° λ§μλ€.
μ΄μμ κ²°κ³Όμμ, λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬λ κΈ°μ§ μ¬μ νλ μ΄μ체νκ° μ μ κ² λλ νκ΄λΆν¬κ° λ§μ κ²μ΄ λΉμ νμ μ λ°©μ¬μ μ μ’
μ μμΈμ΄ λ μ μμμ μμ¬νμκ³ μ΄μκ°μ λ³λ¦¬νμ μκ²¬μ΄ λΉμ νμ μ λ°©μ¬μ μ μ’
μ μ λ°νλ κΈ°μ μ λν μΆκ°μ μΈ μ°κ΅¬κ° νμνλ¦¬λΌ μκ°νλ€.
[μλ¬Έ]
Fibroadenomas of the breast typically show smooth contour, oval or round shape, homogeneous intermediate or hypoechogenicity & they are usually associated with bilateral shadowing, thin boundary, posterior enhancement. However they often show atypical shape of lobular contour, irregular margin, hyper to intermediate internal echogenicity, heterogeneous echogenicity. It is difficult to differentiate these atypical fibroadenomas from malignant masses.
Histopathologically, fibroadenomas are composed of stromal & glandular component. They vary in appearance depending on the relative amounts of glandular & stromal component and cellularity of the stroma. Therefore, the morphologic variations may be attributed to atypical sonographic findings. The purpose of this study is understanding the cause of atypical sonograpic findings by analyzing pathologic correlation to internal echogenicity of breast fibroadenoma.
The material consisted of histopathologically proven 91 fibradenomas in 81 patients from January 1995 through April 1997. Sonographic interpretation was performed & descriptive criteria of mass lesions were tabulated the internal echo content (both strength and distribution), the presence of septum, the bilateral
shadowing, the posterior echo pattern. A pathologist independently reviewed each case and recorded the following data : the cell type, the presence of septum, duct dilatation, calcification, fibrosis, hyalinization, vascularity. We analyzed the correlation of sonographic findings with pathologic findings and the results were as follows.
1. There was significant correlation between the increment of vascularity and the the increment of internal echo strength & between the increment of fibrosis or hyalinization and the decrement of internal echo strength.
2. The more stromal fibrosis, the more homogeneous internal echo pattern and the more vascularity, the more heterogeneous internal echo pattern are noted.
3. The more vascularity, the more posterior enhancement is noted.
4. There was a significant correlation between the increment of hyalinization and presence of septum.
5. There was a correlation between absence or thin capsule and absence of bilateral shadowing.
These results suggest that the increased vascularity or the decreased stromal fibrosis or hyalinization might be the causes of atypical fibroadenoma.
Further studies will be necessary on the mechanism of atypical sonographic findings based on these pathologic findings.restrictio
Correlation of prognostic parameters and 18F-2-deoxy-D-glucose uptake in primary breast cancer
Dept. of Medicine/λ°μ¬[νκΈ]
λͺ©μ : μ λ°©μμ ν¬λλΉ λμ¬κ° νμ§λμ΄ 18F-2-deoxy-D-glucose(FDG)λ₯Ό μ΄μ©ν μμ μλ°©μΆλ¨μΈ΅μ΄¬μ(PET)μΌλ‘ μ§λ¨ν μ μλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, μ λ°©μμμ FDG μμ·¨μ¨μ λ§€μ° λ€μνκ² λνλλ€. λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μμλ νμ€μμ·¨μ¨λ‘ μ λνν FDG μμ·¨μ¨κ³Ό μ¬λ¬ μ‘°μ§λ³λ¦¬νμ μνμΈμ μ¬μ΄μ μκ΄κ΄κ³λ₯Ό κ·λͺ
νκ³ μ νλ€.
λμ λ° λ°©λ²
μμ μ 2μ£Ό μ΄λ΄μ μ μ FDG-PETμμμ 촬μν 20λͺ
μ μλ°μ± μ λ°©μ νμλ₯Ό λμμΌλ‘ νμλ€. νμ€μμ·¨μ¨μ PET μμμμ μλ°μ’
μ μμ κ°μ₯ μμ·¨μ¨μ΄ λμ κ³³μ 4 νμ ν¬κΈ°μ μν κ΄μ¬μμμ κ·Έλ¦° ν μ΅λκ°μΌλ‘ μΈ‘μ νμλ€. 20μμ μ λ°©μ μ‘°μ§μ λμμΌλ‘ μ’
μμ ν¬κΈ°, μ‘μμνμ μΉ¨λ², μ‘°μ§νμ μ’
λ₯, μ‘°μ§νμ λ±κΈ, ν΅λ±κΈ, Ki-67 λ©΄μμΌμμΌλ‘ μΈ‘μ λλ μ’
μμ μ¦μλ ₯, c-erb B-2, p53, μμ€νΈλ‘κ² μμ©μ²΄ μν, νλ‘μ μ€ν
λ‘ μμ©μ²΄ μν, Glut-1μ λΆμνμλ€. FDG μμ·¨μ¨κ³Ό μνμΈμμμ μκ΄κ΄κ³λ Spearman μκ΄κ³μμ Kruskal-Wallis λΉλͺ¨μλ€μ€λΆμλ²μ μ΄μ©ν΄μ λΆμνμκ³ Pκ°μ 0.05λ―Έλ§μΌ λ μ μν κ²μΌλ‘ κ²°μ νμλ€.
κ²°κ³Ό
20μμ μ λ°©μμ μΉ¨μ€μ±κ΄μμ’
13μ, μΉ¨μ€μ±μμ½μνΌμμ’
2μ, κ΄μνΌλ΄μμ’
1μ, μμ§μ±μμ’
1μ, μ μ‘μ±μμ’
1μ, μν¬ν¬λ¦°μμ’
1μ, νμμ±μμ’
1μ μλ€. Ki-67 (r=0.478, P=0.033)κ³Ό μ’
μμ ν¬κΈ° (r=0.589, P=0.006)κ° FDG μμ·¨μ¨κ³Ό ν΅κ³νμ μΌλ‘ μ μν μκ΄κ΄κ³κ° μμλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, FDG μμ·¨μ¨κ³Ό μ‘μμνμ μν (P=0.119), μ‘°μ§νμ μ’
λ₯(P=0.528), μ‘°μ§νμ λ±κΈ (P=0.173), ν΅λ±κΈ (P=0.149), c-erb B-2 (P=0.810), p53 (P=0.171), ER (P=0.460), PR (P=0.750) κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ Glut-1μ λ°νμ¨ (κ°λ: P=0.167, λ©΄μ : P=0.118)κ³Όλ μ μν μκ΄κ΄κ³λ₯Ό λ³Ό μ μμλ€.
κ²°λ‘
μ λ°©μμμ FDGμμ·¨μ¨μ΄ μ‘μμνμ μ μ΄λ, μ‘°μ§νμ λ±κΈ, ν΅λ±κΈ, c-erb B-2, p53, ER, PRκ³Ό κ°μ μνμΈμλ€μ μνλ₯Ό μμΈ‘ν μ μμ΄, FDG μμ·¨μ¨μ λ€μμ±μ μ‘°μ§νμ λΆμκ³Ό λ©΄μμ‘°μ§ννμΌμ λΆμμ ν΅ν΄ μΆ©λΆν μ€λͺ
ν μλ μμλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ PETμμμ FDG μμ·¨μ¨μ Ki-67 λ©΄μμΌμμΌλ‘ μ λνν μΈν¬ μ¦μλ ₯κ³Ό κ΄λ ¨μ΄ μμλ€. λ°λΌμ FDG PETμ μ λ°©μμ νμ±λμ λν μ€μν μ 보λ₯Ό μ 곡ν μ μμλ€.
[μλ¬Έ]PURPOSE : Breast cancer is characterized by increased glucose consumption and can be visualized with positron emission tomography (PET) using18F2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG). However, the FDG uptake of breast cancer varies considerably. Whether the FDG uptake, quantified as standardized uptake value (SUV), correlated with various histopathologic prognostic parameters was evaluated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Twenty patients having primary breast cancer underwent whole-body FDG-PET within 2 weeks prior to surgery. To calculate the SUV, circular region of interest (ROI) comprised of the four pixels with the highest levels of activity, was drawn over the uptake area of the primary tumor in the PET images. Twenty breast cancer specimens were analyzed for tumor size, axillary nodal involvement, histologic type, histologic grade, nuclear grade, Ki-67 immunostaining, c-erb B-2, p53, estrogen
progesterone receptor (ER/PR) status and expression of the glucose transporter protein Glut-1. Correlations between the FDG uptake and prognostic parameters were determined to be significant at P<0.05 using Spearman''s correlation coefficient and Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric multiple-comparisons test.
RESULTS
The twenty breast cancers consisted of 13 invasive ductal, 2 invasive lobular, 1 ductal carcinoma in situ, 1 medullary, 1 mucinous, 1 apocrine, and 1 metaplastic carcinoma. Ki-67 (r=0.478, P=0.033) and tumor size (r=0.589, P=0.006) showed statistically significant positive correlations with FDG uptake. By contrast, there were no correlations between FDG uptake and axillary lymph node status (P=0.119), histologic type (P=0.528), histologic grade (P=0.173), nuclear grade (P=0.149), c-erb B-2 (P=0.810), p53 (P=0.171), ER (P=0.460), PR (P=0.750) , intensity (P=0.167) and area (P=0.118) of Glut-1 expression.
CONCLUSION
The FDG uptake in breast cancer could not estimate the prognostic parameters such as axillary lymph node status, histologic and nuclear grading, c-erb B-2, p53, ER, PR. Therefore, the variation in FDG uptake could not be sufficiently explained by histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analyses. However, FDG uptake during PET in breast cancer increased depending on the proliferative activity indicated by Ki-67 immunohistochemistry. The results indicate that glucose consumption in breast cancer, as determined by FDG-PET, provides valuable information about tumor activity.restrictio
μ μ μ¬μ±μ μ λ°©μ λ°μν μλ°μ± νλ§ μ‘μ’ 1μ
νλ§ μ‘μ’
μ μ£Όλ‘ κ΄μ μ£Όμ μ‘°μ§μ νΈλ°νλ μ
μ± μ’
μμ΄λ€. μ’
μ’
κ΄μ μ΄μΈμ λ€λ₯Έ λΆμμ λ°μνλ κ²½μ°λ λ³΄κ³ λμ΄μλλ°, μλ°μ± μ λ°© νλ§ μ‘μ’
μ μΈκ³μ μΌλ‘λ λ³΄κ³ λ μκ° λλ¬Όλ€. λ³Έ μ¦λ‘λ μλ°μ± μ λ°© νλ§ μ‘μ’
μΌλ‘ μ§λ¨λ 15μΈ μ¬μ νμμ 1μμ΄λ€. μ§λ¨ ν μ λ°© μ’
κ΄΄μ λν κ΄λ²μ μ μ μ μ μννμμΌλ 9κ°μ ν κ΅μ μ¬λ°νμκ³ , μ΄μ μ¬λ° λΆμμ λν κ΄λ²μ μ μ μ μ λ€μ μννμλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ, 27κ°μ ν νμ μ°μμ½μ κ³ λ¦½μ± ν μ μ΄κ° λ°κ²¬λμλ€. μ΄μ ν λ³λ³μ λν μ μ μ λ° κ³ μμ ννμλ²μΌλ‘ doxorubicin λ° ifosfamideμ λ³ν© ννμλ²μ μννμλ€. νμ¬ νμννμλ² μ’
λ£ ν 28κ°μμ§Έ μ¬λ°μ μ¦κ±° μμ΄ κ²½κ³Όκ΄μ°° μ€μ΄λ€. μ΄μ μ μλ€μ λ³Έ μ¦λ‘λ₯Ό λ¬Ένκ³ μ°°κ³Ό ν¨κ» λ³΄κ³ νλ λ°μ΄λ€