Additional value of PET-CT in staging of clinical stage IIB and III breast cancer

Breast Journal

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 617-624

  Segaert, Isabelle ^a   Mottaghy, Felix ^a   Ceyssens, Sarah ^a,b   De Wever, Walter ^a   Stroobants, Sigrid ^a   Van Ongeval, Chantal ^a   Van Limbergen, Eric ^a   Wildiers, Hans ^a   Paridaens, Robert ^a   Vergote, Ignace ^a   Christiaens, Marie Rose ^a   Neven, Patrick ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b ANTWERP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

Author keywords

breast cancer; PET CT; staging

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METASTASIS; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; ULTRASOUND;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 78449294514     PISSN: 1075122X     EISSN: 15244741     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00987.x     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2005; 55: 10-30.
2. Giordano SH, et al. Update on locally advanced breast cancer. The Oncologist 2003; 8: 521-30.
3. Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edn. New York: Springer, 2002.
4. Scheidhauer K, Walter C, Seemann MD, et al. FDG PET and other imaging modalities in the primary diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31 (Suppl 1): S70-9.
5. Avril NE, Weber WA, et al. Monitoring response to treatment in patients utilizing PET. Radiol Clin North Am 2005; 43: 189-204.
6. 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 2003; 38: 250-6.
7. Suarez M, Perez-Castejon MJ, Jimenez A, et al. Early diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer with FDG-PET in patients with progressive elevation of serum tumor markers. Q J Nucl Med 2002; 46: 113-21.
8. Bombardieri E, Crippa F, et al. PET imaging in breast cancer. Q J Nucl Med 2001; 45: 245-56.
9. Eubank WB, Mankoff DA, et al. Evolving role of positron emission tomography in breast cancer imaging. Semin Nucl Med 2005; 35: 84-99.
10. Uematsu T, Yuen S, et al. Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1266-73.
11. Wahl RL, et al. Current status of PET in breast cancer imaging, staging and therapy. Semin Roentgenol 2001; 36: 250-60.
12. Yap CS, Seltzer MA, et al. Impact of whole-body 18F-FDG PET on staging and managing patients with breast cancer: the referring physician's perspective. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 1334-7.
13. Abouzied MM, et al. 18F-FDG imaging: pitfalls and artefacts. J Nucl Med Technol 2005; 33: 145-55.
14. Kazama T, Faria SC, et al. FDG PET in the evaluation of treatment for lymphoma: clinical usefulness and pitfalls. Radiographics 2005; 25: 191-207.
15. Takamochi K, Yoshida J, et al. Pitfalls in lymph node staging with positron emission tomography in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Lung Cancer 2005; 47: 235-42.
16. Mc Donough MD, DePeri ER, Mincey BA, et al. The role of positron emission tomographic imaging in breast cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 2004; 6: 62-8.
17. Zangheri B, Messa C, et al. PET-CT and breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31 (Suppl 1): S135-42.
18. Crippa F, Seregni E, Agresti R, et al. Association between [18F]fluorodeoxy glucose uptake and postoperative histopathology, hormone receptor status, thymidine labelling index and p53 in primary breast cancer: a preliminary observation. Eur J Nucl Med 1998; 25: 1429-34.
19. Lind P, Igerc I, et al. Advantages and limitations of FDG PET in the follow-up of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31 (Suppl 1): S125-34.
20. Gorres GW, Steinert HC, Von Schulthess GK, et al. PET and functional anatomic fusion imaging in lung and breast cancers. Cancer J 2004; 10: 251-61.
21. Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, et al. Clinical performance of PET-CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 1200-9.
22. Townsend DW, Beyer T, Blodgett TM, et al. PET/CT scanners; a hardware approach to image fusion. Semin Nucl Med 2003; 33: 193-204.
23. De Wever W, Ceyssens S, et al. Additional value of PET-CT in staging of lung cancer: comparison with CT alone, PET alone and visual correlation of PET and CT. Eur Radiology 2007; 17: 23-32. (Pubitemid 46063025)
24. Woodward WA, Strom EA, Tucker SL, et al. Changes in the 2003 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging for breast cancer dramatically affect stage-specific survival. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21: 3244-8.
25. Wahl RL, Siegel BA, Coleman RE, Gatsonis GG., et al. 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; 22: 277-85.
26. Ishimori T, Patel PV, Wahl RL, et al. Detection of unexpected additional primary malignancies with PET-CT. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 752-7.
27. Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Mourtzikos KA, Wahl RL,. Initial experience with FDG-PET-CT in the evaluation of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33: 254-62.
28. Eubank WB, Mankoff DA, Takasugi J, et al., 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to detect mediastinal or internal mammary metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 3516-23.