Breast cancer therapy: The role of PET-CT in decision making

Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 53, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 210-223

  Pons, F ^a,b   Duch, J ^a   Fuster, D ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

^b INSTITUT D INVESTIGACIONS BIOMÈDIQUES AUGUST PI I SUNYER IDIBAPS   (Spain)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Chemotherapy, adjuvant; Computed tomography

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

BREAST CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; CANCER THERAPY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HUMAN; METASTASIS; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RECURRENT CANCER; REVIEW; BREAST TUMOR; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 69449101965     PISSN: 18244785     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (81)

1. 18F]FDG in recurrent breast cancer: diagnostic performances, clinical impact and relevance of induced changes in management. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:179-88.
2. Byrne A, Hill A, Skehan S, McDermott E, O'Higgins N. Positron emission tomography in the staging and management of breast cancer. Br J Surg 2004;91:1398-409.
3. Feig SA, Shaber GS, Patchefsky A, Schwartz GF, Edeiken J, Libshitz HI et al. Analysis of clinically occult and mammographically occult breast tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1977;128:403-8. (Pubitemid 8051586)
4. Kalisher L. Factors influencing false negatives rates in xeromammography. Radiology 1979;133:297-301. (Pubitemid 10199124)
5. Sickles EA. Mammographic features of "early" breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1984;143:461-4.
6. Moskowitz M. The predictive value of certain mammographic signs in screening for breast cancer. Cancer 1983;51:1007-11.
7. Amano G, Ohuchi N, Ishibashi T, Ishida T, Amari M, Satomi S. Correlation of three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging with precise histopathological map concerning carcinoma extension in the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2000;60:43-55.
8. Singletary S, Alfred C, Ashley P, Basset L, Berry D, Bland K et al. Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System for Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:3628-36.
9. Fisher B, Gunduz N, Coyle J, Rudock C, Saffer E. Presence of a growth-stimulating factor in serum following primary tumor removal in mice. Cancer Res 1989;49:1996-2001.
10. Fisher B, Shaffer E, Rudock C, Coule J, Gunduz N. Effect of local or systemic treatment prior to primary tumor removal on the production and response to a serum growth-stimulating factor in mice. Cancer Res 1989;49:2002-4.
11. van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ, Julien JP, Tubiana-Hulin M, Vandervelden C, Duchateau L. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:4224-37.
12. 18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:5366-72.
13. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose scintigraphy in diagnosis and follow up of treatment in advanced breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1989;15:61-6.
14. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography compared with conventional imaging procedures. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4746-51.
15. Patz EF Jr, Lowe VJ, Hoffman JM, Paine SS, Burrowes P, Coleman RE et al. Focal pulmonary abnormalities: evaluation with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET scanning. Radiology 1993;188:487-90.
16. Gopalan D, Bomanji JB, Costa DC, Ell PJ. Nuclear medicine in primary breast cancer imaging. Clin Radiol 2002;57:565-74.
17. Hodgson N, Gulenchyn J. Is there a role for positron emission tomography in breast cancer staging? J Clin Oncol 2008;26:712-20.
18. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, Wieand S, Robidoux A, Margolese RG et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: finding form National Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:2483-93. (Pubitemid 27289876)
19. Eltahir A, Heys SD, Hutcheon AW, Sarkar TK, Smith I, Walker LG et al. Treatment of large and locally advanced breast cancer using neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Am J Surg 1998;175:127-32.
20. 18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. In press 2009.
21. Morris S, Corder AP, Taylor I. What are the benefits of routine breast cancer follow-up? Postgrad Med J 1992;68:904-7.
22. Kagan AR, Steckel RJ. Routine imaging for the posttreatment surveillance of breast cancer and colorectal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1991;9:837-42.
23. 18F-FDG PET scans on clinical management of 133 breast cancer patients. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;50:61-7.
24. Landheer ML, Steffens MG, Klinkenbijl JH, Westenberg AH, Oyen WJ. Value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in women with breast cancer. Br J Surg 2005;92:1363-7.
25. Podoloff DA, Advani RH, Allred C, Benson AB 3rd, Brown E, Burstein HJ et al. NCCN task force report: positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) scanning in breast cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2007;Suppl 1:S1-S22.
26. Mankoff D, Dunnwald L, Gralow J, Ellis G, Schubert E, Tseng J et al. Changes in blood flow and metabolism in locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1806-14. (Pubitemid 39663314)
27. 18F- Fluropaclitaxel and PET. J Nucl Med 2006;47:1995-9.
28. 18F-fluoroestradiol. Semin Nucl Med 2007;37:470-6.
29. 18F-FDG PET and PET/CT in the evaluation of cancer treatment response. J Nucl Med 2009;50:88-9.
30. Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, Benson AB 3rd, Bodurka DC, Burstein HJ et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7703-20.
31. Beahrs OH. Staging of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 1991;41:121-5.
32. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, Mamounas E, Brown A, Fisher ER et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:2672-85.
33. Wahl RL, Siegel BA, Coleman RE, Gatsonis CG. Prospective multicenter study of axillary nodal staging by positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a report of the staging breast cancer with PET Study Group.J Clin Oncol 2004;15:277-85.
34. Veronesi U, De Cicco C, Galimberti VE, Fernandez JR, Rotmensz N, Viale G et al. A comparative study on the value of FDG-PET and sentinel node biopsy to identify occult axillary metastases. Ann Oncol 2007;18:473-8.
35. Wu D, Gambhir SS. Positron emission tomography in diagnosis and management of invasive breast cancer: current status and future perspectives. Clin Breast Cancer 2003;4 Suppl 1:S55-63.
36. Baslaim MM, Bakheet SM, Bakheet R, Ezzat A, El-Foudeh M, Tulbah A. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in inflammatory breast cancer. World J Surg 2003;27:1009-14.
37. 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in staging of locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1253-9.
38. Mahner S, Schirrmacher S, Brenner W, Jenicke L, Habermann CR, Avril N et al. Comparison between positron emission tomography using 2-[fluorine-18]fluoro- 2-deoxy-D-glucose, conventional imaging and computed tomography for staging of breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2008;19:1249-54.
39. Fujimoto R, Higashi T, Nakamoto Y, Hara T, Ishizu K, Kawashima H et al. Diagnostic accuracy of bone metastases detection in cancer patients: comparison between bone scintigraphy and whole-body FDG-PET. Ann Nucl Med 2006;20:399-408.
40. 99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun 2001;22:875-9.
41. Dietrich CF, Kratzer W, Strobe D, Danse E, Fessi R, Bunk A et al. Assessment of metastatic liver disease in patients with primary extrahepatic tumors by contrast-enhanced sonography versus CT and MRI. World J Gastroenterol 2006;12:1699-705.
42. Coronado M, Couto RM, Rodado S, Martín LM. (18)F-FDG PET/CT Semiology. Rev Esp Med Nucl 2008;27:284-306.
43. Cortés-Funes. Contribution of PET-CT in diagnostic-therapeutic decisions in medical oncology. Rev Esp Med Nucl 2008;27:79-82.
44. Dose J, Bleckmann C, Bachmann S, Bohuslavizki KH, Berger J, Jenicke L et al. Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and "conventional diagnostic procedures" for the detection of distant metastases in breast cancer patients. Nucl Med Commun 2002;23:857-64.
45. Mikhaeel NG. Use of FDG-PET to monitor response to chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with lymphomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33 Suppl 1:22-6.
46. Weber WA, Figlin R. Monitoring cancer treatment with PET/CT: does it make a difference? J Nucl Med 2007;48 Suppl 1:36S-44S.
47. Biersack HJ, Bender H, Palmedo H. FDG-PET in monitoring therapy of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31 Suppl 1:S112-S117. (Pubitemid 38833040)
48. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics 2007. CA Cancer J Clin 2007;57:43-66.
49. von Minckwitz G, Raab G, Caputo A, Schütte M, Hilfrich J, Blohmer JU et al. Doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide followed by doxetacel every 21 days compared with doxorubicin and doxetaxel every 14 days as preoperative treatment in operable breast cancer. The GEOARDUO study of the German Breast Group. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:2676-85.
50. Chollet P, Charrier S, Brain E, Curé H, van Praagh I, Feillel V et al. Clinical and pathological response to primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1997;3:862-6.
51. Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Kanenishi K, Ohno M, Hata T, Kushida Y et al. Monitoring the neoadjuvant therapy response in gynecological cancer patients using FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:287-95.
52. Baum RP, Przetak C. Evaluation of therapy response in breast and ovarian cancer patients by positron emission tomography (PET). Q J Nucl Med 2001;45:257-68. (Pubitemid 34182907)
53. Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol 1993;11:2101-11.
54. Bassa P, Kim EE, Inoue T, Wong FC, Korkmaz M, Yang DJ et al. Evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy using PET with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 1996;37:931-8.
55. Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Chilcott F et al. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1676-88.
56. Schelling M, Avril N, Nährig J, Kuhn W, Römer W, Sattler D et al. Positron emission tomography using [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1689-95.
57. Honkoop AH, van Diest PJ, de Jong JS, Linn SC, Giaccone G, Hoekman K et al. Prognostic role of clinical, pathological and biological characteristics in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1998;77:621-6.
58. Berriolo-Riedinger A, Touzery C, Riedinger JM, Toubeau M, Coudert B, Arnould L et al. [(18)F]FDG-PET predicts complete pathological response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:1915-24.
59. Sataloff DM, Mason BA, Prestipino AJ, Seinige UL, Lieber CP, Baloch Z. Pathologic response to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the breast: a determinant of outcome. J Am Coll Surg 1995;180:297-306.
60. Jansson T, Westlin JE, Ahlstrom H, Lilja A, Langstrom B, Bergh J. Positron emission tomography studies in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer: a method for early therapy evaluation? J Clin Oncol 1995;13:1470-7.
61. Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, Ellis GK, Livingston RB, Linden HM, Specht J et al. Tumor metabolism and blood flow changes by positron emission tomography: relation to survival in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:4449-57.
62. Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, Hutcheon AW, Sarkar TK, Smith L et al. A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast 2003;12:320-7.
63. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:205-16.
64. Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J. RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment. Eur J Cancer 2006;42:1031-9.
65. 18F-FDG PET and conventional imaging for predicting outcome in previously treated breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2002;43:325-9. (Pubitemid 34208093)
66. 18F] FDG PET for pathological response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2004;15:1352-7.
67. 18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Eur J Cancer 2002;38:375-9.
68. 18F] FDG-PET after chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: prognostic value as compared with histopathology. Ann Oncol 2008;19:1573-7.
69. 18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in the early assessment of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients. Clin Breast Cancer 2000;1:156-61.
70. Schwarz JD, Bader M, Jenicke L, Hemminger G, Jänicke F, Avril N. Early prediction of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer using sequential 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1144-50. (Pubitemid 43741076)
71. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:6437-43.
72. Lindholm P, Lapela M, Nagren K, Lehikoinen P, Minn H, Jyrkkio S. Preliminary study of carbon-11 methionine PET in the evaluation of early response to therapy in advanced breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2008;30:30-6.
73. Thompson CJ. Instrumentation for positron emission mammography. In: Avril N, editor. PET Clinics: breast cancer. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders Company; 2006.p.33-8.
74. Murthy K, Aznar M, Thompson CJ, Loutfi A, Lisbona R, Gagnon JH. Results of preliminary clinical trials of the positron emission mammography system PEM-I: a dedicated breast imaging system producing glucose metabolic images using FDG. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1851-8.
75. Eubank WB, Mankoff DA. Evolving role of positron emission tomography in breast cancer imaging. Semin Nucl Med 2005;35:84-99.
76. Dehdashti F, Mortimer JE, Siegel BA, Griffeth LK, Bonasera TJ, Fusselman MJ et al. Positron tomographic assessment of estrogen receptors in breast cancer: comparison with FDG-PET and in vitro receptor assays. J Nucl Med 1995;36:1766-74.
77. Dehdashti F, Flanagan FL, Mortimer JE, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ, Siegel BA. Positron emission tomographic assessment of "metabolic flare" to predict response of metastatic breast cancer to antiestrogen therapy. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26:51-6.
78. Teicher BA. Hypoxia and drug resistance. Cancer Metastasis Rev 1994;13:139-68.
79. Piwnica-Worms D, Chiu ML, Budding M, Kronauge JF, Kramer RA, Croop JM. Functional imaging of multidrug-resistant P-glycoprotein with an organotechnetium complex. Cancer Res 1993;53:977-84. (Pubitemid 23087894)
80. Elsinga PH, Franssen EJ, Hendrikse NH, Fluks L, Weemaes AM, van der Graaf WT et al. Carbon-11-labeled daunorubicin and verapamil for probing P-glycoprotein in tumors with PET.J Nucl Med 1996;37:1571-5.
81. Mankoff DA, Dehdashti F, Shields AF. Characterizing tumors using metabolic imaging: PET imaging of cellular proliferation and steroid receptors.Neoplasia 2000;2:71-88.