Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 28, Issue 19, 2010, Pages 3154-3159

  Morris, Patrick G ^a   Lynch, Colleen ^a   Feeney, John N ^a   Patil, Sujata ^a   Howard, Jane ^a   Larson, Steven M ^a   Dickler, Maura ^a   Hudis, Clifford A ^a   Jochelson, Maxine ^a   McArthur, Heather L ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; BONE; BONE TUMOR; BREAST TUMOR; METASTASIS; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; SCINTISCANNING; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BONE AND BONES; BONE NEOPLASMS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77955482466     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.27.5743     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Hillner BE, Weeks JC, Desch CE, et al: Pamidronate in prevention of bone complications in metastatic breast cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Oncol 18:72-79, 2000 (Pubitemid 30036338)
2. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, et al: Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:2942-2953, 2004 (Pubitemid 41079914)
3. Fogelman I, Cook G, Israel O, et al: Positron emission tomography and bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 35:135-142, 2005 (Pubitemid 40568746)
4. Fuster D, Duch J, Paredes P, et al: Preoperative staging of large primary breast cancer with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography compared with conventional imaging procedures. J Clin Oncol 26:4746-4751, 2008
5. American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging. http://www.cancerstaging.org/ staging/index.html
6. National Comprehensive Cancer Network: National Comprehensive Cancer Network Practice Guidelines in Oncology, version 1.2009, 2009
7. Khatcheressian JL, Wolff AC, Smith TJ, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology 2006 update of the breast cancer follow-up and management guidelines in the adjuvant setting. J Clin Oncol 24:5091-5097, 2006
8. Abe K, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, et al: Comparison of 18FDG-PET with 99mTc-HMDP scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med 19:573-579, 2005 (Pubitemid 43161842)
9. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, et al: Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: Differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol 16:3375-3379, 1998 (Pubitemid 28481635)
10. Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T, et al: Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32:1253-1258, 2005 (Pubitemid 41598715)
11. Dose-Schwarz J, Mahner S, Schirrmacher S, et al: Detection of metastases in breast cancer patients: Comparison of FDG PET with chest X-ray, bone scintigraphy and ultrasound of the abdomen [in German]. Nuklearmedizin 47:97-103, 2008 (Pubitemid 351881403)
12. Ohta M, Tokuda Y, Suzuki Y, et al: Whole body PET for the evaluation of bony metastases in patients with breast cancer: Comparison with 99Tcm-MDP bone scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun 22:875-879, 2001 (Pubitemid 32681625)
13. Gallowitsch HJ, Kresnik E, Gasser J, et al: 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 38:250-256, 2003 (Pubitemid 36535030)
14. Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ, et al: Comparing whole body (18)F-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 128:325-328, 2002
15. Basu S, Chen W, Tchou J, et al: Comparison of triple-negative and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma using quantitative fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose/positron emission tomography imaging parameters: A potentially useful method for disease characterization. Cancer 112:995-1000, 2008 (Pubitemid 351304582)
16. Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Kotzerke J, et al: Early detection and accurate description of extent of metastatic bone disease in breast cancer with fluoride ion and positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 17:2381-2389, 1999 (Pubitemid 29368236)
17. Kumar R, Dhanpathi H, Basu S, et al: Oncologic PET tracers beyond [(18)F]FDG and the novel quantitative approaches in PET imaging. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 52:50-65, 2008 (Pubitemid 351351044)
18. Smith-Jones PM, Solit DB, Akhurst T, et al: Imaging the pharmacodynamics of HER2 degradation in response to Hsp90 inhibitors. Nat Biotechnol 22:701-706, 2004 (Pubitemid 38702826)
19. Akhurst T, Morris PG, Modi S, et al: Positron emission tomography with radiolabeled F(ab′)2-trastuzumab fragments in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC): Initial feasibility results. American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Symposium, Washington, DC, September 5-7, 2008 (abstr 79)
20. Morris PG, Akhurst T, Smith-Jones P, et al: Cu-64-trastuzumab imaging in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer receiving trastuzumab therapy: Initial results. American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Symposium, San Francisco, CA, October 8-10, 2009 (abstr 83)