Welcome to Francis Academic Press

International Journal of Frontiers in Medicine, 2023, 5(11); doi: 10.25236/IJFM.2023.051101.

Status and Progress of Multimodal Ultrasound Diagnosis of Triple-negative Breast Cancer


Yan Peng1, Xiaoling Huang2

Corresponding Author:
Xiaoling Huang

1Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China

2The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, 400016, China


Breast cancer is a highly heterogeneous cancer that is exceptionally harmful to women. It is generally divided by immunohistochemistry into four primary molecular subtypes: triple-negative (TN), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression, luminal A, and luminal B. Different breast cancer molecular subtypes exhibit diverse biological traits, clinical symptoms, therapeutic responses, and prognoses. Among them, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a highly malignant subtype with no particular treatment modalities and an inferior prognosis. As diverse ultrasonographies can offer complementing information on various features of breast cancer, multimodal ultrasonography provides a more reliable method for predicting TNBC than conventional ultrasound alone. This article reviews the research status and progress of multimodal ultrasound diagnostic techniques such as traditional ultrasound combined with sonoelastography (SE), contrast ultrasonography (CEUS), three-dimensional ultrasound (3D-US) and superb microvascular imaging (SMI) in predicting triple-negative breast cancer. It aims to use ultrasound diagnosis technology to predict TNBC and provide a reference for guiding clinical treatment and enhancing prognosis.


Triple-negative breast cancer, Multimodal ultrasound, Diagnosis

Cite This Paper

Yan Peng, Xiaoling Huang. Status and Progress of Multimodal Ultrasound Diagnosis of Triple-negative Breast Cancer. International Journal of Frontiers in Medicine (2023), Vol. 5, Issue 11: 1-9. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFM.2023.051101.


[1] Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel R L, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2021; 71(03):209.

[2] Siegel R L, Miller K D, Wagle N S, et al. Cancer statistics, 2023. Ca Cancer J Clin. 2023; 73(01):17.

[3] Zardavas D, Irrthum A, Swanton C, Piccart M. Clinical management of breast cancer heterogeneity. Nature reviews Clinical oncology. 2015;12(07):381.

[4] Sadeghalvad M, Mohammadi-Motlagh H-R, Rezaei N. Immune microenvironment in different molecular subtypes of ductal breast carcinoma. Breast cancer research and treatment. 2021;185:261.

[5] Turner K M, Yeo S K, Holm T M, et al. Heterogeneity within molecular subtypes of breast cancer. American Journal of Physiology-Cell Physiology. 2021;321(02):C343.

[6] Keegan T H, Press D J, Tao L, et al. Impact of breast cancer subtypes on 3-year survival among adolescent and young adult women. Breast Cancer Research. 2013;15:1.

[7] Murphy B L, Day C N, Hoskin T L, et al. Adolescents and young adults with breast cancer have more aggressive disease and treatment than patients in their forties. Annals of surgical oncology. 2019; 26:3920.

[8] Tian Qingzhou, Wang Yun, Guo Hao, et al. Recent perspectives of management of breast cancer metastasis-an update. J buon. 2017;22(02):295.

[9] Goldhirsch A, Winer E P, Coates A, et al. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Annals of oncology. 2013;24(09):2206.

[10] Kohler B A, Sherman R L, Howlader N, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2011, featuring incidence of breast cancer subtypes by race/ethnicity, poverty, and state. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2015;107(06):djv048.

[11] Zhang Shuying, Ding Yan, Zhu Qiaoying, et al. Correlation factors analysis of breast cancer tumor volume doubling time measured by 3D-ultrasound. Medical Science Monitor: International Medical Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research. 2017;23:3147.

[12] Li Shiyu, Niu Ruilan, Wang Bo, et al. Determining whether the diagnostic value of B-ultrasound combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and shear wave elastography in breast mass-like and non-mass-like lesions differs: a diagnostic test. Gland Surgery. 2023;12(02):282.

[13] Lee E J, Chang Y W. Combination of quantitative parameters of shear wave elastography and superb microvascular imaging to evaluate breast masses. Korean Journal of Radiology. 2020; 21(09): 1045.

[14] Kapetas P, Clauser P, Woitek R, et al. Quantitative multiparametric breast ultrasound: application of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and elastography leads to an improved differentiation of benign and malignant lesions. Investigative radiology. 2019;54(05):257.

[15] Ding Zuopeng, Liu Weiyong, He Nianan, et al. Value of ultrasound elastography combined with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and micro-flow imaging in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions. American Journal of Translational Research. 2021;13(12):13941.

[16] Zhang Yi, Sun Xiaofeng, Li Jingjing, et al. The diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and superb microvascular imaging in differentiating benign from malignant solid breast lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation. 2022;81(02):109.

[17] Li Jiawei, Zhang Kai, Shi Zhaoting, et al. Author correction: Triple-negative invasive breast carcinoma: the association between the sonographic appearances and clinicopathological features. Scientific Reports. 2020;10.

[18] Liu Hui, Wan Jing, Xu Guang, et al. Conventional US and 2-D shear wave elastography of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification: correlation with immunohistochemical breast cancer subtypes. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 2019;45(10):2612.

[19] Wu Tong, Li Jing, Wang Dongmo, et al. Identification of a correlation between the sonographic appearance and molecular subtype of invasive breast cancer: A review of 311 cases. Clinical Imaging. 2019; 53:179.

[20] Pulappadi V P, Dhamija E, Baby A, et al. Imaging Features of Breast Cancer Subtypes on Mammography and Ultrasonography: an Analysis of 479 Patients. Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2022; 13(04):931.

[21] Sheng Changrui, Gao Shanshan, Yan Liming, et al. Application value of conventional ultrasound combined with shear wave elastography in diagnosing triple-negative breast cancer. Gland Surgery. 2021; 10(06):1980.

[22] Yang Qi, Liu Hongyan, Liu Dan, et al. Ultrasonographic Features of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: a Comparison with Other Breast Cancer Subtypes. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2015; 16(08):3229.

[23] Lerma E, Barnadas A, Prat J. Triple-negative breast carcinomas: similarities and differences with basal-like carcinomas. Applied Immunohistochemistry & Molecular Morphology. 2009;17(06):483.

[24] Gumowska M, Mączewska J, Prostko P, et al. Is there a correlation between multiparametric assessment in ultrasound and intrinsic subtype of breast cancer? Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021; 10(22):5394.

[25] Huang Zhifang, Chen Li, Wang Yong, et al. Molecular markers, pathology, and ultrasound features of invasive breast cancer. Clinical Imaging. 2021;79:85.

[26] Du Haiyan, Lin Baorong, Huang Duping. Ultrasonographic findings of triple-negative breast cancer. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. 2015;8(06):10040.

[27] Choi Y J, Seong M H, Choi S H, et al. Ultrasound and Clinicopathological Characteristics of Triple Receptor-Negative Breast Cancers. Journal of Breast Cancer. 2011;14(02).

[28] Wang Kangjian, Zou Zongkai, Shen Haolin, et al. Calcification, Posterior Acoustic, and Blood Flow: Ultrasonic Characteristics of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Journal of Healthcare Engineering. 2022; 2022.

[29] Adler D D, Carson P L, Rubin J M, et al. Doppler ultrasound color flow imaging in the study of breast cancer: preliminary findings. Ultrasound in medicine & biology. 1990;16(06):553.

[30] Zhu Junyan, He Hanlu, Jiang Xiaochun, et al. Multimodal ultrasound features of breast cancers: correlation with molecular subtypes. BMC Medical Imaging. 2023;23(01):1.

[31] Kurt S A, Kayadibi Y, Saracoglu M S,et al. Prediction of molecular subtypes using superb microvascular imaging and shear wave elastography in invasive breast carcinomas. Academic Radiology. 2023;30(01):14.

[32] Woo O H, Shin H S. Reproducibility and Diagnostic Performance of Shear Wave Elastography in Evaluating Breast Solid Mass. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. 2017;43:S100.

[33] Chang J M, Park I A, Lee S H, et al. Stiffness of tumors measured by shear-wave elastography correlated with subtypes of breast cancer. European radiology. 2013;23:2450.

[34] Kang H J, Kim J Y, Lee N K, et al. Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional shear-wave elastography: Associations of mean elasticity values with prognostic factors and tumor subtypes of breast cancer. Clinical Imaging. 2018;48:79.

[35] Džoić Dominković M, Ivanac G, Kelava T, Brkljačić B. Elastographic features of triple negative breast cancers. European radiology. 2016;26:1090.

[36] Youk J H, Gweon H M, Son E J, et al. Shear-wave elastography of invasive breast cancer: correlation between quantitative mean elasticity value and immunohistochemical profile. Breast cancer research and treatment. 2013;138:119.

[37] Ganau S, Andreu F J, Escribano F, et al. Shear-wave elastography and immunohistochemical profiles in invasive breast cancer: evaluation of maximum and mean elasticity values. European journal of radiology. 2015;84(04):617.

[38] Wan Jing, Wu Rong, Yao Minghua, et al. Acoustic radiation force impulse elastography in evaluation of triple-negative breast cancer: A preliminary experience. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation. 2018;70(03):301.

[39] Pu Huan, Zhao Lixia, Yao Minghua, et al. Conventional US combined with acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) elastography for prediction of triple-negative breast cancer and the risk of lymphatic metastasis. Clinical hemorheology and microcirculation. 2017;65(04):335.

[40] Chen Weiping, Ru Rongrong, Wang Fang, et al. Automated breast volume scanning combined with shear wave elastography for diagnosis of triple-negative breast cancer and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer. Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. 2021;67:1167.

[41] Cheng Chunxia, Yang Shiyan, Zhao Hanxiao, et al. Characteristics of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and virtual touch tissue imaging of triple-negative breast cancer and analysis of influencing ractors. Clin Ultrasound in Med. 2023;25(06):483.

[42] WU Fang, Cheng Jing,Cao Chunli, et al. Ultrasonic elastic characteristics of breast cancers with different molecular subtype. Chinese Journal of Medical Imaging Technology. 2020:1017.

[43] Choi W J, Kim H H, Cha J H, et al. Predicting prognostic factors of breast cancer using shear wave elastography. Ultrasound in medicine & biology. 2014;40(02):269.

[44] Li Cheng,Liang Jianfeng,Zeng Fuqiang,Chen Xiang. Difference in the mean of elasticity in shear-wave elastography among breast cancer of different molecular subtypes and pathological features. Journal of Guangxi Medical University. 2020;37(03):483.

[45] Denis M, Gregory A, Bayat M, et al. Correlating tumor stiffness with immunohistochemical subtypes of breast cancers: prognostic value of comb-push ultrasound shear elastography for differentiating luminal subtypes. PloS one. 2016;11(10):e0165003.

[46] Xiao Xiaoyun, Chen Xin, Guan Xiaofeng, et al. Superb microvascular imaging in diagnosis of breast lesions: a comparative study with contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic microvascular imaging. The British journal of radiology. 2016;89(1066):20160546.

[47] Wu Fang,Cheng Jing,Ma Ting, et al. Analysis of the contrast-enhanced ultrasound features of breast cancer for different molecular types. Clin Ultrasound in Med. 2019;21(01):1.

[48] Zuo Wensi,Lin Linyuan,Li Fensui. Comparative study of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in different molecular breast cancers. Journal of Molecular Imaging. 2019;42(04):423.

[49] Dong Ji, Wu Pengxi, Zhou Fengsheng, et al. Characteristics and diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in breast cancer with different molecular typing. Med Imaging. 2022; 32:441.

[50] Huang Xiaoli,Huang Xianghong,Wang Xiaoyan. The Characteristics of Contrast-enhanced Ultrasonography of the Triple Negative Breast Cancer and Non-triple Negative Breast Cancer. ChineseJUltrasound Med. 2016;32(09):844.

[51] Zhang Y, Chen M. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound features of triple-negative breast cancer. Annals of Oncology. 2016;27:vi96.

[52] Liang Xingyu, Li Ziyao, Zhang Lei, et al. Application of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the differential diagnosis of different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Ultrasonic Imaging. 2020; 42(06):261.

[53] Wen Baojie, Kong Wentao, Zhang Yidan, et al. Association Between Contrast‐Enhanced Ultrasound Characteristics and Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2022;41(08):2019.

[54] Zhang Xiaoyan, Zhang Li, Li Na, et al. Vascular index measured by smart 3-D superb microvascular imaging can help to differentiate malignant and benign breast lesion. Cancer Management and Research. 2019:5481.

[55] Park A Y, Kwon M, Woo O H, et al. A prospective study on the value of ultrasound microflow assessment to distinguish malignant from benign solid breast masses: association between ultrasound parameters and histologic microvessel densities. Korean journal of radiology. 2019;20(05):759.

[56] Lee E J, Chang Y W, Oh E, et al. Reproducibility and diagnostic performance of the vascular index of superb microvascular imaging in real-time breast ultrasonography for evaluating breast masses. Ultrasonography. 2021;40(03):398.

[57] Chae E Y, Yoon G Y, Cha J H, et al. Added value of the vascular index on superb microvascular imaging for the evaluation of breast masses: comparison with grayscale ultrasound. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 2021;40(04):715.

[58] Zhang Xiaoyan, Cai Siman, Zhang Li, et al. Association between vascular index measured via superb microvascular imaging and molecular subtype of breast cancer. Frontiers in Oncology. 2022; 12:861151.

[59] Zheng Fengyang, Lu Qing, Huang Beijian, et al. Imaging features of automated breast volume scanner: Correlation with molecular subtypes of breast cancer. European Journal of Radiology. 2017; 86:267.

[60] van Zelst J C, Balkenhol M, Tan T, Rutten M, et al. Sonographic phenotypes of molecular subtypes of invasive ductal cancer in automated 3-D breast ultrasound. Ultrasound in medicine & biology. 2017; 43(09):1820.

[61] Li Ziyao, Tian Jiawei, Wang Xiaowei, et al. Differences in Multimodal Ultrasound Imaging between Triple Negative and Non-Triple Negative Breast Cancer. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 2016; 42(04):882.

[62] Kook S H, Park H W, Lee Y R, et al. Evaluation of solid breast lesions with power Doppler sonography. Journal of clinical ultrasound. 1999;27(05):231.

[63] Chang Y C, Huang Y S, Huang C S, et al. Intrinsic subtypes and tumor grades in breast cancer are associated with distinct 3-D power Doppler sonographic vascular features. European Journal of Radiology. 2014;83(08):1368.

[64] QI Bing, LI Ziyao, TIAN Jiawei. Application of three-dimensional ultrasound in the diagnosis of different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Chinese Journal of Ultrasonography. 2020:249.