FDG-PET/CT compared with conventional imaging in the detection of distant metastases of primary breast cancer

Oncologist

Volumn 16, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 1111-1119

  Niikura, Naoki ^a,b   Costelloe, Colleen M ^a   Madewell, John E ^a   Hayashi, Naoki ^a   Tse Kuan, Yu ^a   Liu, Jun ^a   Palla, Shana L ^a   Tokuda, Yutaka ^b   Theriault, Richard L ^a   Hortobagyi, Gabriel N ^a   Ueno, Naoto T ^a  

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

^b TOKAI UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Pet ct; Primary staging

Indexed keywords

AROMATASE INHIBITOR; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; TRASTUZUMAB; ZOLEDRONIC ACID;

ADULT; ADVANCED CANCER; AGED; ARTICLE; BRAIN METASTASIS; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISTANT METASTASIS; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIVER METASTASIS; LUNG METASTASIS; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIMARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCINTIGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOGRAPHY; RADIONUCLIDE IMAGING; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80052209289     PISSN: 10837159     EISSN: 1549490X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0089     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Müller D, Kohler G, Ohlinger R. Staging procedures in primary breast cancer. Anticancer Res 2008;28:2397-2400.
2. Schneider C, Fehr MK, Steiner RA et al. Frequency and distribution pattern of distant metastases in breast cancer patients at the time of primary presentation. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2003;269:9-12.
3. Gerber B, Seitz E, Müller H et al. Perioperative screening for metastatic disease is not indicated in patients with primary breast cancer and no clinical signs of tumor spread. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2003;82:29-37.
4. Carlson RW, McCormick B. Update: NCCN breast cancer clinical practice guidelines. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2005;3(suppl 1):S7-S11.
5. Puglisi F, Follador A, Minisini AM et al. Baseline staging tests after a new diagnosis of breast cancer: Further evidence of their limited indications. Ann Oncol 2005;16:263-266.
6. Hodgson NC, Gulenchyn KY. Is there a role for positron emission tomography in breast cancer staging? J Clin Oncol 2008;26:712-720.
7. Baslaim MM, Bakheet SM, Bakheet R et al. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography in inflammatory breast cancer. World J Surg 2003;27:1099-1104.
8. Landheer ML, Steffens MG, Klinkenbijl JH et al. Value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in women with breast cancer. Br J Surg 2005;92:1363-1367.
9. van der Hoeven JJ, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS et al. 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-dglucose positron emission tomography in staging of locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1253-1259.
10. Grahek D, Montravers F, Kerrou K et al. [18F]FDG in recurrent breast cancer: Diagnostic performances, clinical impact and relevance of induced changes in management. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:179-188.
11. 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 2008;26:4746-4751.
12. Carkaci S, Macapinlac HA, Cristofanilli M et al. Retrospective study of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer: Preliminary data. J Nucl Med 2009;50:231-238.
13. Alberini JL, Lerebours F, Wartski M et al. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) imaging in the staging and prognosis of inflammatory breast cancer. Cancer 2009;115: 5038-5047.
14. Heusner TA, Kuemmel S, Umutlu L et al. Breast cancer staging in a single session: Whole-body PET/CT mammography. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1215-1222.
15. Groheux D, Moretti JL, Baillet G et al. Effect of (18)F-FDG PET/CT imaging in patients with clinical stage II and III breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;71:695-704.
16. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247.
17. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y et al. From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009;50(suppl 1):122S-150S.
18. Costelloe CM, Chuang HH, Madewell JE et al. Cancer response criteria and bone metastases: RECIST 1.1, MDA and PERCIST. J Cancer 2010; 1:80-92.
19. Hamaoka T, Costelloe CM, Madewell JE et al. Tumour response interpretation with new tumour response criteria vs the World Health Organisation criteria in patients with bone-only metastatic breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2010;102:651-657.
20. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA et al. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2942-2953.
21. Heusner TA, Kuemmel S, Koeninger A et al. Diagnostic value of diffusionweighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) compared to FDG PET/CT for whole-body breast cancer staging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37:1077-1086.
22. Aukema TS, Rutgers EJ, Vogel WV et al. The role of FDG PET/CT in patients with locoregional breast cancer recurrence: A comparison to conventional imaging techniques. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009;36:387-392.
23. Costelloe CM, Chuang HH, Madewell JE. FDG PET for the detection of bone metastases: Sensitivity, specificity and comparison with other imaging modalities. PET Clin 2010;5:281-295.
24. Costelloe CM, Rohren EM, Madewell JE et al. Imaging bone metastases in breast cancer: Techniques and recommendations for diagnosis. Lancet Oncol 2009;10:606-614.
25. Morris PG, Lynch C, Feeney JN et al. Integrated positron emission tomography/ computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3154-3159.
26. 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 2001;22:875-879.
27. 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 2002;128:325-328.
28. Kao CH, Hsieh JF, Tsai SC et al. Comparison and discrepancy of 18F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and Tc-99m MDP bone scan to detect bone metastases. Anticancer Res 2000;20:2189-2192.
29. Mahner S, Schirrmacher S, BrennerWet 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;19:1249-1254.