Emerging Techniques and Molecular Imaging in Breast Cancer

Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 288-299

  Yang, Wei Tse ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHOLINE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIUM; METHOXY ISOBUTYL ISONITRILE TECHNETIUM TC 99M; OMOCIANINE;

ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SPECIFIC GAMMA IMAGING; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DEDICATED COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFUSE OPTICAL TOMOGRAPHY; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DRUG RESPONSE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; LIGHT SCATTERING; LOW ENERGY RADIATION; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASTECTOMY; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NEAR INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; OPTICAL TOMOGRAPHY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSITRON EMISSION MAMMOGRAPHY; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOFREQUENCY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPECTROSCOPY, NEAR-INFRARED;

EID: 79960494795     PISSN: 08872171     EISSN: 15585034     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1053/j.sult.2011.03.003     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Berg W.A., Gutierrez L., NessAiver M.S., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 2004, 233:830-849.
2. Mandelson M.T., Oestreicher N., Porter P.L., et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000, 92:1081-1087.
3. Kolb T.M., Lichy J., Newhouse J.H. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002, 225:165-175.
4. Niklason L.T., Christian B.T., Niklason L.E., et al. Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology 1997, 205:399-406.
5. Niklason L.E., Kopans D.B., Hamberg L.M. Digital breast imaging: tomosynthesis and digital subtraction mammography. Breast Dis 1998, 10:151-164.
6. Poplack S.P., Tosteson T.D., Kogel C.A., et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007, 189:616-623.
7. Good W.F., Abrams G.S., Catullo V.J., et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis: a pilot observer study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008, 190:865-869.
8. Helvie MA, Roubidoux M, Zhang Y, et al: Tomosynthesis mammography versus conventional mammography: lesion detection and reader preference-initial experience. Presented at the Radiologic Society of North America 92nd Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, November 26-December 1, 2006.
9. Lo JY, Durham NC, Baker JA: Breast tomosynthesis: assessing patient compression, comfort, and preference. Presented at the Radiologic Society of North America 92nd Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, 2006.
10. Teertstra H.J., Loo C.E., van den Bosch M.A., et al. Breast tomosynthesis in clinical practice: initial results. Eur Radiol 2010, 20:16-24.
11. Helvie MA, Chan HP, Hadjiiski L, et al: Digital breast tomosynthesis mammography: successful assessment of benign and malignant microcalcifications. Presented at the Radiologic Society of North America 95th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, November 28-December 4, 2009.
12. Jong R.A., Yaffe M.J., Skarpathiotakis M., et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2003, 228:842-850.
13. Lewin J.M., Isaacs P.K., Vance V., et al. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital subtraction mammography: feasibility. Radiology 2003, 229:261-268.
14. Diekmann F., Diekmann S., Jeunehomme F., et al. Digital mammography using iodine-based contrast media: initial clinical experience with dynamic contrast medium enhancement. Invest Radiol 2005, 40:397-404.
15. Dromain C., Balleyguier C., Muller S., et al. Evaluation of tumor angiogenesis of breast carcinoma using contrast-enhanced digital mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006, 187:W528-W537.
16. Chen S.C., Carton A.K., Albert M., et al. Initial clinical experience with contrast-enhanced digital breast tomosynthesis. Acad Radiol 2007, 14:229-238.
17. Diekmann F., Bick U. Tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced digital mammography: recent advances in digital mammography. Eur Radiol 2007, 17:3086-3092.
18. Dromain C., Balleyguier C., Adler G., et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Eur J Radiol 2009, 69:34-42.
19. Boone J.M., Nelson T.R., Lindfors K.K., et al. Dedicated breast CT: radiation dose and image quality evaluation. Radiology 2001, 221:657-667.
20. Chen Z., Ning R. Why should breast tumour detection go three dimensional?. Phys Med Biol 2003, 48:2217-2228.
21. Chen B., Ning R. Cone-beam volume CT breast imaging: feasibility study. Med Phys 2002, 29:755-770.
22. Lindfors K.K., Boone J.M., Nelson T.R., et al. Dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology 2008, 246:725-733.
23. O'Connell A., Conover D.L., Zhang Y., et al. Cone-beam CT for breast imaging: radiation dose, breast coverage, and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010, 195:496-509.
24. Somerville P, Destounis S, Murphy P, et al: A comparison of cone beam breast computed tomography (CBBCT) to MRI of the breast. Presented at the Radiological Society of North America Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Oak Brook, IL, 2010.
25. Seifert P, Somerville P, Murphy P, et al: Initial experience of cone beam breast computed tomography (CBBCT) with or without contrast in a community-based practice. Presented at the Radiological Society of North America Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Oak Brook, IL, 2009.
26. Berg W.A., Weinberg I.N., Narayanan D., et al. High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression ("positron emission mammography") is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer. Breast J 2006, 12:309-323.
27. Berg W.A., Madsen K.S., Schilling K., et al. Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast. Radiology 2011, 258:59-72.
28. Kalinyak J.E., Schilling K., Berg W.A., et al. PET-guided breast biopsy. Breast J 2011, 17:143-151.
29. Yang WT, Rohren E, Mawlawi O, et al: Functional imaging of triple receptor negative versus HER2 overexpressing breast cancer. Presented in Electronic Exhibit # E018, American Roentgen Ray Society 2011 Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL, May 1-6, 2011.
30. Brem R.F., Schoonjans J.M., Kieper D.A., et al. High-resolution scintimammography: a pilot study. J Nucl Med 2002, 43:909-915.
31. Brem R.F., Rapelyea J.A., Zisman G., et al. Occult breast cancer: scintimammography with high-resolution breast-specific gamma camera in women at high risk for breast cancer. Radiology 2005, 237:274-280.
32. Brem R.F., Fishman M., Rapelyea J.A. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ with mammography, breast specific gamma imaging, and magnetic resonance imaging: a comparative study. Acad Radiol 2007, 14:945-950.
33. Brem R.F., Floerke A.C., Rapelyea J.A., et al. Breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct imaging modality for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology 2008, 247:651-657.
34. O'Connor M., Rhodes D., Hruska C. Molecular breast imaging. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2009, 9:1073-1080.
35. Raza S., Vallejo M., Chikarmane S.A., et al. Pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a range of MRI features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008, 191:689-699.
36. Hruska C.B., Phillips S.W., Whaley D.H., et al. Molecular breast imaging: use of a dual-head dedicated gamma camera to detect small breast tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008, 191:1805-1815.
37. Rhodes D.J., Hruska C.B., Phillips S.W., et al. Dedicated dual-head gamma imaging for breast cancer screening in women with mammographically dense breasts. Radiology 2011, 258:106-118.
38. Gribbestad I.S., Singstad T.E., Nilsen G., et al. In vivo 1H MRS of normal breast and breast tumors using a dedicated double breast coil. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998, 8:1191-1197.
39. Roebuck J.R., Cecil K.M., Schnall M.D., et al. Human breast lesions: characterization with proton MR spectroscopy. Radiology 1998, 209:269-275.
40. Kvistad K.A., Bakken I.J., Gribbestad I.S., et al. Characterization of neoplastic and normal human breast tissues with in vivo 1H MR spectroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999, 10:159-164.
41. Kim J.K., Park S.H., Lee H.M., et al. In vivo 1H-MRS evaluation of malignant and benign breast diseases. Breast 2003, 12:179-182.
42. Jacobs M.A., Barker P.B., Argani P., et al. Combined dynamic contrast enhanced breast MR and proton spectroscopic imaging: a feasibility study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005, 21:23-28.
43. Baek H.M., Yu H.J., Chen J.H., et al. Quantitative correlation between (1)H MRS and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of human breast cancer. Magn Reson Imaging 2008, 26:523-531.
44. Bartella L., Thakur S.B., Morris E.A., et al. Enhancing nonmass lesions in the breast: evaluation with proton (1H) MR spectroscopy. Radiology 2007, 245:80-87.
45. Guo Y., Cai Y.Q., Cai Z.L., et al. Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002, 16:172-178.
46. Kinoshita T., Yashiro N., Ihara N., et al. Diffusion-weighted half-Fourier single-shot turbo spin echo imaging in breast tumors: differentiation of invasive ductal carcinoma from fibroadenoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2002, 26:1042-1046.
47. Kuroki Y., Nasu K., Kuroki S., et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of breast cancer with the sensitivity encoding technique: analysis of the apparent diffusion coefficient value. Magn Reson Med Sci 2004, 3:79-85.
48. Woodhams R., Kakita S., Hata H., et al. Identification of residual breast carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: diffusion-weighted imaging-comparison with contrast-enhanced MR imaging and pathologic findings. Radiology 2010, 254:357-366.
49. Park S.H., Moon W.K., Cho N., et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging: pretreatment prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. Radiology 2010, 257:56-63.
50. Mahmood U., Tung C.H., Bogdanov A., et al. Near-infrared optical imaging of protease activity for tumor detection. Radiology 1999, 213:866-870.
51. Tromberg B.J., Shah N., Lanning R., et al. Non-invasive in vivo characterization of breast tumors using photon migration spectroscopy. Neoplasia 2000, 2:26-40.
52. Poplack S.P., Paulsen K.D., Hartov A., et al. Electromagnetic breast imaging: average tissue property values in women with negative clinical findings. Radiology 2004, 231:571-580.
53. Poplack S.P., Tosteson T.D., Wells W.A., et al. Electromagnetic breast imaging: results of a pilot study in women with abnormal mammograms. Radiology 2007, 243:350-359.
54. Gibson A.P., Hebden J.C., Arridge S.R. Recent advances in diffuse optical imaging. Phys Med Biol 2005, 50:R1-R43.
55. Kukreti S., Cerussi A.E., Tanamai W., et al. Characterization of metabolic differences between benign and malignant tumors: high-spectral-resolution diffuse optical spectroscopy. Radiology 2010, 254:277-284.
56. Brown J.M. The hypoxic cell. Cancer Res 1999, 59:5863-5870.
57. Zhu Q., Cronin E.B., Currier A.A., et al. Benign versus malignant breast masses: optical differentiation with US-guided optical imaging reconstruction. Radiology 2005, 237:57-66.
58. Zhu Q., Hegde P.U., Ricci A., et al. Early-stage invasive breast cancers: potential role of optical tomography with US localization in assisting diagnosis. Radiology 2010, 256:367-378.
59. Folkman J., Watson K., Ingber D., et al. Induction of angiogenesis during the transition from hyperplasia to neoplasia. Nature 1989, 339:58-61.
60. Ermilov SA, Fronheiser MP, Nadvoretsky V, et al: Real-time optoacoustic imaging of breast cancer using an interleaved two-laser imaging system coregistered with ultrasound. Proceedings of SPIE 7564: 75641W1-74641W-7, 2010.
61. Intes X., Ripoll J., Chen Y., et al. In vivo continuous-wave optical breast imaging enhanced with indocyanine green. Med Phys 2003, 30:1039-1047.
62. Corlu A., Choe R., Durduran T., et al. Three-dimensional in vivo fluorescence diffuse optical tomography of breast cancer in humans. Opt Express 2007, 15:6696-6716.
63. Poellinger A., Burock S., Grosenick D., et al. Breast cancer: early- and late-fluorescence near-infrared imaging with indocyanine green-a preliminary study. Radiology 2011, 258:409-416.
64. Tromberg B.J., Cerussi A., Shah N., et al. Imaging in breast cancer: diffuse optics in breast cancer-detecting tumors in pre-menopausal women and monitoring neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res 2005, 7:279-285.
65. Jiang S., Pogue B.W., Carpenter C.M., et al. Evaluation of breast tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with tomographic diffuse optical spectroscopy: case studies of tumor region-of-interest changes. Radiology 2009, 252:551-560.
66. Zhu Q., Kurtzma S.H., Hegde P., et al. Utilizing optical tomography with ultrasound localization to image heterogeneous hemoglobin distribution in large breast cancers. Neoplasia 2005, 7:263-270.
67. Mankoff D.A., Dunnwald L.K., Gralow J.R., et al. Blood flow and metabolism in locally advanced breast cancer: relationship to response to therapy. J Nucl Med 2002, 43:500-509.
68. Hsiung P.L., Phatak D.R., Chen Y., et al. Benign and malignant lesions in the human breast depicted with ultrahigh resolution and three-dimensional optical coherence tomography. Radiology 2007, 244:865-874.
69. Tsushima Y., Takahashi-Taketomi A., Endo K. Magnetic resonance (MR) differential diagnosis of breast tumors using apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) on 1.5T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009, 30:249-255.