A systematic review of FDG-PET in breast cancer

Medical Oncology

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 114-129

  Escalona, S ^a   Blasco, J A ^a   Reza, M M ^a   Andradas, E ^a   Gomez N ^b  

^a Unidad de Evaluacion de Tecnologias Sanitarias   (Spain)

^b HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO LA PAZ   (Spain)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Breast neoplasm; Breast tumour; FDG PET; Positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE; METHOXY ISOBUTYL ISONITRILE TECHNETIUM TC 99M;

BONE METASTASIS; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; METASTASIS; MICROMETASTASIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIMARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENT DISEASE; REVIEW; SAFETY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 77949273998     PISSN: 13570560     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12032-009-9182-3     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Screening for Breast Cancer. World Health Organization 2006 Available at: http://www.who.int/cancer/detection/breastcancer/en/. Accessed 12 December 2006.
2. Ferlay J, Bray F, Pisani P, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2002: Cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide, version IARC CancerBase No.5. Lyon: IARC Press; 2004. Disponible en: www.dep.iarc.fr/globocan/globocan.html. Accessed 12 December 2006.
3. A Cabrera-Villegas MJ García-Vellos C Gómez Cenzano 2002 Tomografía por emisión de positrones (FDG-PET) en oncología clínica (Parte III) Rev Esp Med Nucl 21 4 304 20 1:STN:280: DC%2BD38vkvFamtA%3D%3D 12206748
4. K Yutani E Shiba H Kusuoka M Tatsumi T Uehara T Taguchi, et al. 2000 Comparison of FDG-PET with MIBI-SPECT in the detection of breast cancer and axillary lymph node metastasis J Comput Assist Tomogr 24 2 274 80 10.1097/00004728-200003000-00017 10.1097/00004728-200003000-00017 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c3hsVGltA%3D%3D 10752892 (Pubitemid 32206208)
5. R Jaeschke G Guyatt DL Sackett 1994 Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group JAMA 271 5 389 91 10.1001/jama.271.5.389 10.1001/jama.271.5.389 1:STN:280:DyaK2c7htFaltA%3D%3D 8283589 (Pubitemid 24037915)
6. Kumar R, Chauhan A, Zhuang H, Chandra P, Schnall M, Alavi A. Clinicopathologic factors associated with false negative FDG-PET in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;98(3):267-74. doi: 10.1007/s10549-006-9159-2. (Pubitemid 44195596)
7. LP Adler JP Crowe NK Al-Kaisi JL Sunshine 1993 Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose FDG-PET Radiology 187 3 743 50 1:STN:280:DyaK3s3mvV2jsg%3D%3D 8497624
8. H Schirrmeister T Kuhn A Guhlmann C Santjohanser T Horster K Nussle, et al. 2001 Fluorine-18 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose FDG-PET in the preoperative staging of breast cancer: comparison with the standard staging procedures Eur J Nucl Med 28 3 351 8 10.1007/s002590000448 10.1007/s002590000448 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXitFeiu7o%3D 11315604
9. DN Danforth Jr L Aloj JA Carrasquillo SL Bacharach C Chow J Zujewski, et al. 2002 The role of 18F-FDG-PET in the local/regional evaluation of women with breast cancer Breast Cancer Res Treat 75 2 135 46 10.1023/A:1019664126220 10.1023/A:1019664126220 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XlvFSquro%3D 12243506 (Pubitemid 34994949)
10. C Marshall S Mustafa DC Wheatley JE Eremin M EI-Sheemy JA Jibril, et al. 2004 A comparison of 18F-F-FDG gamma camera PET, mammography and ultrasonography in demonstrating primary disease in locally advanced breast cancer Nucl Med Commun 25 7 721 5 10.1097/01.mnm.0000130239.76326.ca 10.1097/01.mnm.0000130239. 76326.ca 15208500 (Pubitemid 38901690)
11. JP Crowe Jr LP Adler RR Shenk J Sunshine 1994 Positron emission tomography and breast masses: comparison with clinical, mammographic and pathological findings Ann Surg Oncol 1 2 132 40 10.1007/BF02303557 10.1007/BF02303557 7834438
12. DM Bruce NT Evans SD Heys G Needham H BenYounes P Mikecz, et al. 1995 Positron emission tomography: 2-deoxy-2-[18F]-fluoro-D-glucose uptake in locally advanced breast cancers Eur J Surg Oncol 21 3 280 3 10.1016/S0748-7983(95) 91492-7 10.1016/S0748-7983(95)91492-7 1:STN:280:DyaK2MzgtV2qsQ%3D%3D 7781797
13. DY Noh IJ Yun JS Kim HS Kang DS Lee JK Chung, et al. 1998 Diagnostic value of positron emission tomography for detecting breast cancer World J Surg 22 3 223 7 10.1007/s002689900374 10.1007/s002689900374 1:STN:280: DyaK1c7lsFGitA%3D%3D 9494412 (Pubitemid 28113392)
14. AY Rostom J Powe A Kandil A Ezzat S Bakheet F El-Khwsky, et al. 1999 Positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a clinicopathological correlation of results Br J Radiol 72 863 1064 8 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c7msFKnuw%3D%3D 10700822
15. W Walter K Scheidhauer A Scharl U-J Goering P Theissen H Kugel, et al. 2003 Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesions Eur Radiol 13 7 1651 6 10.1007/s00330-002-1816-1 10.1007/s00330-002-1816-1 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3szgslaitw%3D%3D 12835981 (Pubitemid 36869359)
16. A Rieber H Schirrmeister A Gabelmann K Nuessle S Reske R Kreienberg, et al. 2002 Pre-operative staging of invasive breast cancer with MR mammography and/or FDG-PET: boon or bunk? Br J Radiol 75 898 789 98 1:STN:280: DC%2BD38nitl2ltA%3D%3D 12381687
17. H Palmedo H Bender F Grunwald P Mallmann P Zamora D Krebs, et al. 1997 Comparison of fluorine-18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99m methosyisobutylisonitrile scintimammography in the detection of breast tumours Eur J Nucl Med 24 9 1138 45 1:STN:280:DyaK2svjtVSltA%3D%3D 9283107
18. M Heinsich HJ Gallowitsch P Mikosch E Kresnik G Kumnig I Gomez, et al. 2003 Comparison of FDG-PET and dynamic contrast-enhanced RM in the evaluation of suggestive breast lesions Breast 12 1 17 22 10.1016/S0960-9776(02)00262-X 10.1016/S0960-9776(02)00262-X (Pubitemid 36395482)
19. N Avril J Dose F Janicke S Bense Z Ziegler C Laubenbacher, et al. 1996 Metabolic characterization of breast tumours with positron emission tomography using F-18 fluorodeoxiglucose J Clin Oncol 14 6 1848 57 1:STN:280: DyaK283ktlOnsQ%3D%3D 8656253
20. N Avril CA Rose M Schelling J Dose W Kuhn S Bense, et al. 2000 Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations J Clin Oncol 18 20 3495 502 1:STN:280: DC%2BD3M%2Fhsl2hsA%3D%3D 11032590
21. E Bombardieri F Crippa L Maffioli A Chiti MR Castellani M Greco, et al. 1996 Axillary lymph node metastases detection with nuclear medicine approaches in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer: can positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-FDG be considered as the best method? Int J Oncol 8 4 693 9
22. F Crippa R Agresti E Seregni M Greco C Pascali A Bogni, et al. 1998 Prospective evaluation of fluorine-18-FDG PET in presurgical staging of the axilla in breast cancer J Nucl Med 39 1 4 8 1:STN:280:DyaK1c7gtl2ltA%3D%3D 9443729
23. U Guller EU Nitzsche U Schirp CT Viehl J Torhorst H Moch, et al. 2002 Selective axillary surgery in breast cancer patients based on positron emission tomography with 18F-F-fluoro-2.deoxy-D-glucose: not yet! Breast Cancer Res Treat 71 2 171 3 10.1023/A:1013828710301 10.1023/A:1013828710301 11881913 (Pubitemid 34145374)
24. R Wahl BA Siegel RE Coleman CG Gatsonis K Van Zee JE Mendez 2004 Prospective multicenter study of axillary nodal staging by positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a report of the staging of breast cancer with FDG-PET study group J Clin Oncol 22 2 277 85 10.1200/JCO.2004.04.148 10.1200/JCO.2004.04.148 14722036 (Pubitemid 41095092)
25. N Avril J Dose F Janicke S Ziegler W Romer W Weber, et al. 1996 Assessment of axillary lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with positron emission tomography using radiolabeled 2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy- D-glucose J Natl Cancer Inst 88 17 1204 9 10.1093/jnci/88.17.1204 10.1093/jnci/88.17.1204 1:STN:280:DyaK28znsVegug%3D%3D 8780629
26. IC Smith KN Ogston P Whitford FW Smith P Sharp M Norton, et al. 1998 Staging of the axilla in breast cancer: accurate in vivo assessment using positron emission tomography with 2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose Ann Surg 228 2 220 7 10.1097/00000658-199808000-00012 10.1097/00000658-199808000- 00012 1:STN:280:DyaK1czns1CisQ%3D%3D 9712568 (Pubitemid 30191718)
27. Y Nakamoto AE Chang KR Zasadny RL Wahl 2002 Comparison of attenuation-corrected and non-corrected FDG-PET images for axillary nodal staging in newly diagnosed breast cancer Mol Imaging Biol 4 2 161 9 10.1016/S1536-1632(01)00005-1 10.1016/S1536-1632(01)00005-1 14537139 (Pubitemid 34272700)
28. E Barranger D Grahek M Antoine F Montravers J-N Talbot S Uzan 2003 Evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of axillary lymph node metastases in patients with early-stage breast cancer Ann Surg Oncol 10 6 622 7 10.1245/ASO.2003.12.019 10.1245/ASO.2003.12.019 12839846 (Pubitemid 40486893)
29. JJ van der Hoeven OS Hoekstra EF Comans R Pijpers RP Boom D Van Geldere, et al. 2002 Determinants of diagnostic performance of [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for axillary staging in breast cancer Ann Surg 236 5 619 24 10.1097/00000658-200211000-00012 10.1097/00000658-200211000-00012 12409668 (Pubitemid 35246894)
30. G Zornoza MJ Garcia-Velloso J Sola FM Regueira L Pina C Beorlegui 2004 18F-FDG FDG-PET complemented with sentinel lymph node biopsy in the detection of axillary involvement in breast cancer Eur J Surg Oncol 30 1 15 9 10.1016/j.ejso.2003.10.010 10.1016/j.ejso.2003.10.010 1:STN:280: DC%2BD2c%2Fjslaisw%3D%3D 14736517 (Pubitemid 38180986)
31. JR Bellon RB Livingston WB Eubank JR Gralow GK Ellis LK Dunnwald, et al. 2004 Evaluation of the internal mammary lymph nodes by FDG-PET in locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) Am J Clin Oncol 27 4 407 10 10.1097/01.coc. 0000128869.19357.9b 10.1097/01.coc.0000128869.19357.9b 15289736 (Pubitemid 39045254)
32. R Kumar H Zhuang MD Schnall 2006 FDG PET positive lymph nodes are highly predictive of metastasis in breast cancer Nucl Med Commun 27 3 231 6 10.1097/00006231-200603000-00005 10.1097/00006231-200603000-00005 16479242 (Pubitemid 44391810)
33. MK Fehr R Hornung Z Varga D Burge T Hess U Haller, et al. 2004 Axillary staging using positron emission tomography in breast cancer patients qualifying for sentinel lymph node biopsy Breast J 10 2 89 93 10.1111/j.1075-122X.2004. 21455.x 10.1111/j.1075-122X.2004.21455.x 15009033 (Pubitemid 38375027)
34. M Ohta Y Tokuda Y Saitoh Y Suzuki A Okumura M Kubota, et al. 2000 Comparative efficacy of positron emission tomography and ultrasonography in preoperative evaluation of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer Breast Cancer 7 1 99 103 10.1007/BF02967197 10.1007/BF02967197 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3cvnvFWrsQ%3D%3D 11029780
35. WB Eubank DA Mankoff J Takasugi H Vesselle JF Eary TJ Shanley, et al. 2001 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to detect mediastinal or internal mammary metastases in breast cancer J Clin Oncol 19 15 3516 23 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MvjtlOmtQ%3D%3D 11481358
36. TW Stadnik H Everaert S Makkat R Sacre J Lamote C Bourgain 2006 Breast imaging. Preoperative breast cancer staging: Comparison of USPIO-enhanced MR imaging and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDC) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging for axillary lymph node staging-initial findings Eur Radiol 16 10 2153 60 10.1007/s00330-006-0276-4 10.1007/s00330-006-0276-4 16670863 (Pubitemid 44354549)
37. JH Yang SJ Nam TS Lee HK Lee SH Jung BT Kim 2001 Comparison of intraoperative frozen section analysis of sentinel node with preoperative positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of axillary lymph node status in breast cancer patients Jpn J Clin Oncol 31 1 1 6 10.1093/jjco/hye007 10.1093/jjco/hye007 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M7mtFSjtw%3D%3D 11256834
38. PR Kelemen V Lowe N Phillips 2002 Positron emission tomography and sentinel lymph node dissection in breast cancer Clin Breast Cancer 3 1 73 7 10.3816/CBC.2002.n.014 10.3816/CBC.2002.n.014 12020398
39. A Gil-Rendo G Zornoza M Garcia-Velloso FM Regueira C Beorlegui M Cervera 2006 Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with sentinel lymph node biopsy for evaluation of axillary involvement in breast cancer Br J Surg 93 6 707 12 10.1002/bjs.5338 10.1002/bjs.5338 1:STN:280:DC%2BD283ptVaitQ%3D%3D 16622900 (Pubitemid 43886022)
40. PJ Lovrics V Chen G Coates SD Cornacchi CH Goldsmith C Law, et al. 2004 A prospective evaluation of positron emission tomography scanning, sentinel lymph node biopsy, and standard axillary dissection for axillary staging in patients with early stage breast cancer Ann Surg Oncol 11 9 846 53 10.1245/ASO.2004.11. 033 10.1245/ASO.2004.11.033 15313737 (Pubitemid 40568812)
41. A Chung D Liou S Karlan A Waxman K Fujimoto M Haggike, et al. 2006 Preoperative FDG-PET for axillary metastases in patients with breast cancer Arch Surg 141 8 783 8 10.1001/archsurg.141.8.783 10.1001/archsurg.141.8.783 16924086 (Pubitemid 44268521)
42. D Vranjesevic JE Filmont J Meta DH Silverman ME Phelps J Rao, et al. 2002 Whole-body (18)F-FDG FDG-PET and conventional imaging for predicting outcome in previously treated breast cancer patients J Nucl Med 43 3 325 9 11884491
43. ER Port H Yeung M Gonen L Liberman J Caravelli P Borgen, et al. 2006 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography scanning affects surgical management in selected patients with high-risk, operable breast carcinoma Ann Surg Oncol 13 5 677 84 10.1245/ASO.2006.03.035 10.1245/ASO.2006.03.035 16538409
44. J Dose C Bleckmann S Bachmann KH Bohuslavizki J Berger L Jenicke, et al. 2002 Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and 'conventional diagnostic procedures' for the detection of distant metastases in breast cancer patients Nucl Med Commun 23 9 857 64 10.1097/00006231-200209000- 00009 10.1097/00006231-200209000-00009 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38Xntlyhsb0%3D 12195090 (Pubitemid 35052973)
45. T Inoue K Yutani T Taguchi Y Tamaki E Shiba S Noguchi 2004 Preoperative evaluation of prognosis in breast cancer patients by [18F]2-Deoxy-2-fluoro-D- glucose-positron emission tomography J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 130 5 273 8 10.1007/s00432-003-0536-5 10.1007/s00432-003-0536-5 14986112 (Pubitemid 38680268)
46. H-J Gallowitsch E Kresnik J Gasser G Kumnig I Igerc P Mikosch, et al. 2003 F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography in the diagnosis of tumor recurrence and metastases in the follow-up of patients with breast carcinoma: a comparison to conventional imaging Invest Radiol 38 5 250 6 10.1097/00004424-200305000-00002 10.1097/00004424-200305000-00002 12750613 (Pubitemid 36535030)
47. GJ Cook S Houston R Rubens MN Maisey I Fogelman 1998 Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG FDG-PET: differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions J Clin Oncol 16 10 3375 9 1:STN:280:DyaK1cvltV2qtw%3D%3D 9779715
48. T Nakai C Okuyama T Kubota K Yamada Y Ushijima K Taniike, et al. 2005 Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32 11 1253 8 10.1007/s00259-005-1842-8 10.1007/s00259-005-1842-8 16133397 (Pubitemid 41598715)
49. K Abe M Sasaki Y Kuwabara H Koga S Baba K Hayashi, et al. 2005 Comparison of 18FDG-PET with 99mTc-HMDP scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer Ann Nucl Med 19 7 573 9 10.1007/BF02985050 10.1007/BF02985050 16363622
50. M Ohta Y Tozuda Y Suzuki M Kubota H Makuuchi J Tarima, et al. 2001 Whole body FDG-PET for the evaluation of bony metastases in patients with breast cancer: comparison with 99Tcm-MDP bone scintigraphy Nucl Med Commun 22 8 875 9 10.1097/00006231-200108000-00005 10.1097/00006231-200108000-00005 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXmsVymsb0%3D 11473206 (Pubitemid 32681625)
51. I Raileanu D Grahek F Montravers K Kerrou N Aide N Younsi, et al. 2004 Comparison of [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium bisphosphonate bone scintigraphy to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer [French] Medecine Nucleaire 28 7 297 303
52. SN Yang JA Liang FJ Lin CH Kao CC Lin CC Lee 2002 Comparing whole body 18F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99m methylene diphosphonate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 128 6 325 8 10.1007/s00432-002-0342-5 10.1007/s00432-002-0342-5 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38zivFOhsw%3D%3D 12073051 (Pubitemid 34569354)
53. T Uematsu S Yuen S Yukisawa T Aramaki N Morimoto M Endo, et al. 2005 Comparison of FDG FDG-PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer AJR Am J Roentgenol 184 4 1266 73 15788608
54. M Suarez MJ Perez-Castejon A Jimenez M Domper G Ruiz R Montz, et al. 2002 Early diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer with FDG-PET in patients with progressive elevation of serum tumor markers Q J Nucl Med 46 2 113 21 1:STN:280:DC%2BD38zntVCisQ%3D%3D 12114874
55. C-S Liu YY Shen CC Lin RF Yen CH Kao 2002 Clinical impact of [18F]FDG-PET in patients with suspected recurrent breast cancer based on asymptomatically elevated tumor marker serum levels: a preliminary report Jpn J Clin Oncol 32 7 244 7 10.1093/jjco/hyf052 10.1093/jjco/hyf052 12324574 (Pubitemid 43102807)
56. EM Kamel MT Wyss MK Fehr GK Von Schulthess GW Goerres 2003 [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with suspected recurrence of breast cancer J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 129 3 147 53 12712329
57. W Siggelkow M Zimny A Faridi K Zold U Buell W Rath 2003 The value of positron emission tomography in the follow-up for breast cancer Anticancer Res 23 2C 1859 67 12820470
58. GW Goerres SC Michel MK Fehr AH Kaim HC Steinert B Seifert, et al. 2003 Follow-up of women with breast cancer: comparison between RM and FDG FDG-PET Eur Radiol 13 7 1635 44 10.1007/s00330-002-1720-8 10.1007/s00330-002-1720-8 12835979 (Pubitemid 36869357)
59. H Bender J Kirst H Palmedo A Schomburg U Wagner J Ruhlmann, et al. 1997 Value of 18fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the staging of recurrent breast carcinoma Anticancer Res 17 3 B 1687 92 1:STN:280: DyaK2szit1Ohuw%3D%3D 9179219
60. BJ Fueger WA Weber A Quon TL Crawford MS len-Auerbach BS Halpern, et al. 2005 Performance of 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography and integrated FDG-PET/CT in restaged breast cancer patients Mol Imaging Biol 7 5 369 76 10.1007/s11307-005-0013-4 10.1007/s11307-005-0013-4 16220355 (Pubitemid 44193414)
61. TS Kim Woo Kyung Moon DS Lee K Chung Myung Chul Lee K Youn, et al. 2001 Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for detection of recurrent or metastatic breast cancer World J Surg 25 7 829 34 10.1007/s002680020095 10.1007/s002680020095 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MrisVCquw%3D%3D 11572019 (Pubitemid 32666379)
62. ML Landheer MG Steffens JH Klinkenbijl AH Westenberg WJ Oyen 2005 Value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in women with breast cancer Br J Surg 92 11 1363 7 10.1002/bjs.5046 10.1002/bjs.5046 1:STN:280: DC%2BD2Mrntlequg%3D%3D 16187254 (Pubitemid 41546632)
63. JF Santiago M Gonen H Yeung H Macapinlac S Larson 2006 A retrospective analysis of the impact of 18F-FDG PET scans on clinical management of 133 breast cancer patients Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 50 1 61 7 1:STN:280: DC%2BD287mvVSnsg%3D%3D 16557205
64. RL Wahl K Zasadny M Helvie GD Hutchins B Weber R Cody 1993 Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation J Clin Oncol 11 11 2101 11 1:STN:280: DyaK2c%2FksFyisQ%3D%3D 8229124
65. M Schelling N Avril J Nahrig W Kuhn W Romer D Saltier, et al. 2000 Positron emission tomography using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer J Clin Oncol 18 8 1689 95 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c3islyjsw%3D%3D 10764429
66. SJ Kim SK Kim ES Lee J Ro SH Kang 2004 Predictive value of [18F]FDG FDG-PET for pathological response of breast cancer to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy Ann Oncol 15 9 1352 7 10.1093/annonc/mdh345 10.1093/annonc/mdh345 15319241 (Pubitemid 39295023)
67. IC Smith AE Welch AW Hutcheon ID Miller S Payne F Chilcott, et al. 2000 Positron emission tomography using [18F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 18 8 1676 88 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c3islyjsg%3D%3D 10764428
68. SE Stafford JR Gralow EK Schubert KJ Rinn LK Dunnwald RB Livingston, et al. 2002 Use of serial FDG pet to measure the response of bone-dominant breast cancer to therapy Acad Radiol 9 8 913 21 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80461-0 10.1016/S1076-6332(03)80461-0 12186440 (Pubitemid 34856284)
69. P Bassa EE Kim T Inoue FC Wong M Korkmaz DJ Yang, et al. 1996 Evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy using FDG-PET with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in breast cancer J Nucl Med 37 6 931 8 1:CAS:528:DyaK28Xkt1KlsL4%3D 8683314
70. RJ Burcombe A Makris M Pittam J Lowe J Emmott WL Wong 2002 Evaluation of good clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in primary breast cancer using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography Eur J Cancer 38 3 375 9 10.1016/S0959-8049(01)00379-3 10.1016/S0959-8049(01)00379-3 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38XovFShtA%3D%3D 11818202 (Pubitemid 34121965)
71. R Tiling R Linke M Untch A Richter S Fieber K Brinkbaumer, et al. 2001 18F-FDG FDG-PET and 99mTc-sestamibi scintimammography for monitoring breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a comparative study Eur J Nucl Med 28 6 711 20 10.1007/s002590100539 10.1007/s002590100539 1:CAS:528: DC%2BD3MXktlalu7s%3D 11440031
72. F Cachin HM Prince A Hogg RE Ware RJ Hicks 2006 Powerful prognostic staging by [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 24 19 3026 31 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.6326 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.6326 16717291 (Pubitemid 46638936)
73. O Couturier G Jerusalem JM N'Guyen R Hustinx 2006 Sequential positron emission tomography using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer Clin Cancer Res 12 21 6437 43 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0383 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0383 1:CAS:528: DC%2BD28XhtFKitbzJ 17085657 (Pubitemid 44799716)
74. F Dehdashti FL Flanagan JE Mortimer JA Katzenellenbogen MJ Welch BA Siegel 1999 Positron emission tomographic assessment of 'metabolic flare' to predict response of metastatic breast cancer to antiestrogen therapy Eur J Nucl Med 26 1 51 6 10.1007/s002590050359 10.1007/s002590050359 1:CAS:528: DyaK1cXnvFSis70%3D 9933662 (Pubitemid 29137739)
75. JE Mortimer F Dehdashti BA Siegel K Trinkaus JA Katzenellenbogen MJ Welch 2001 Metabolic flare: indicator of hormone responsiveness in advanced breast cancer J Clin Oncol 19 11 2797 803 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3MXltVGgs7w%3D 11387350
76. Positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for breast cancer. Lansdale PA: Hayes, Inc. Hayes Medical Technology Directory; 2001.
77. Samson D, Flamm CR, Aronson N. FDG positron emission tomography for evaluating breast cancer. Chicago, IL: Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association; 2001. 290-97-001-5.
78. FDG positron emission tomography for evaluating breast cancer. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association; 2003. Assessment Program vol. 18, no. 14.
79. CR Isasi RM Moadel MD Blaufox 2005 A meta-analysis of FDG-PET for the evaluation of breast cancer recurrence and metastases Breast Cancer Res Treat 90 2 105 12 10.1007/s10549-004-3291-7 10.1007/s10549-004-3291-7 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2MXivVKhsrc%3D 15803356 (Pubitemid 40568893)
80. Biersack HJ, Bender H, Palmedo H. FDG-PET in monitoring therapy of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004; Suppl 1:S112-7. doi: 10.1007/s00259-004-1533-x.
81. Uematsu T, Kasami M, Yuen S. Comparison of FDG PET and MRI for evaluating the tumor extent of breast cancer and the impact of FDG PET on the systemic staging and prognosis of patients who are candidates for breast-conserving therapy. Breast cancer. 2008. doi: 10.2007/s12282-008-0065-9.
82. Expanded Coverage for PET Scans for Cervical and Other Cancers, New Coding for PET Scans, and Billing Requirements for PET Scans for Specific Indications of Cervical and Other Cancers. [Internet monograph]. USA: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services; 2005 [Accessed 24 July 2008]. Available at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MLNMattersArticles/downloads/MM3741.pdf.
83. WA Berg IN Weinberg D Narayanan ME Lobrano E Ross L Amodei, et al. 2006 High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression ("positron emission mammography") is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer Breast J 12 4 309 23 10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00269.x 10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00269.x 16848840 (Pubitemid 43989975)
84. A Dormeier M Bahre I Lauer U Germer B Meller A Geipel, et al. 2000 Positron emission tomography in the evaluation of breast lesions. [German] Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 60 1 59 62 10.1055/s-2000-9767 10.1055/s-2000-9767 (Pubitemid 30084182)