Analysis of incidental focal hypermetabolic uptake in the breast as detected by 18F-FDG PET/CT: Clinical significance and differential diagnosis

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 53, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 530-535

  Chae, Eun Young ^a   Cha, Joo Hee ^a   Kim, Hak Hee ^a   Shin, Hee Jung ^a   Kim, Hyun Ji ^a   Oh, Ha Yeun ^a   Koh, Young Hwan ^b   Moon, Dae Hyuk ^a  

^a Asan Medical Center   (South Korea)

^b National Cancer Center   (South Korea)

Author keywords

18F FDG PET CT; Breast; Incidentaloma; Mammography; Ultrasound

Indexed keywords

BENIGN LESION; BREAST; BREAST CANCER; BREAST DISEASE; BREAST LESION; CT DATA; CUT-OFF VALUE; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FDG PET; INCIDENTALOMA; MALIGNANT LESION; MEAN DIAMETER; WHOLE-BODY;

DIAGNOSIS; ULTRASONICS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

MAMMOGRAPHY;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INCIDENTAL FINDING; MAMMOGRAPHY; METABOLISM; MIDDLE AGED; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; RADIOGRAPHY; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCINTISCANNING; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; INCIDENTAL FINDINGS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 84861870995     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/ar.2012.120015     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Kostakoglu L, Agress H Jr, Goldsmith SJ. Clinical role of FDG PET in evaluation of cancer patients. Radiographics 2003;23:315-340; quiz 533 (Pubitemid 37431265)
2. 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;44:1201-9
3. Bakheet SM, Powe J. Benign causes of 18-FDG uptake on whole body imaging. Semin Nucl Med 1998;28:352-8 (Pubitemid 28478048)
4. Kostakoglu L, Hardoff R, Mirtcheva R, et al. PET-CT fusion imaging in differentiating physiologic from pathologic FDG uptake. Radiographics 2004;24:1411-31 (Pubitemid 39329385)
5. Agress H Jr, Cooper BZ. Detection of clinically unexpected malignant and premalignant tumors with whole-body FDG PET: histopathologic comparison. Radiology 2004;230:417-22 (Pubitemid 38133801)
6. Ishimori T, Patel PV, Wahl RL. Detection of unexpected additional primary malignancies with PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2005;46:752-7
7. Litmanovich D, Gourevich K, Israel O, et al. Unexpected foci of 18F-FDG uptake in the breast detected by PET/CT: incidence and clinical significance. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36:1558-64
8. Israel O, Yefremov N, Bar-Shalom R, et al. PET/CT detection of unexpected gastrointestinal foci of 18F-FDG uptake: incidence, localization patterns, and clinical significance. J Nucl Med 2005;46:758-62
9. Ozkol V, Alper E, Aydin N, et al. The clinical value of incidental 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-avid foci detected on positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Nucl Med Commun 2010;31:128-36
10. D'Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, Berg WA, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS - mammography. 4th edn. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
11. Korn RL, Yost AM, May CC, et al. Unexpected focal hypermetabolic activity in the breast: significance in patients undergoing 18F-FDG PET/ CT. Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:81-5 (Pubitemid 46100149)
12. Kang BJ, Lee JH, Yoo IR, et al. Clinical significance of incidental finding of focal activity in the breast at 18F-FDG PET/CT. Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:341-7
13. Lee JH, Yim SH, Won YJ, et al. Population-based breast cancer statistics in Korea during 1993-2002: incidence, mortality, and survival. J Korean Med Sci 2007;22:S11-S16
14. Kumar R, Lal N, Alavi A. 18F-FDG PET in detecting primary breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2007;48:1751; author reply 1752 (Pubitemid 47572723)
15. Rosen EL, Eubank WB, Mankoff DA. FDG PET, PET/CT, and breast cancer imaging. Radiographics 2007;27 (Suppl. 1):S215-S229
16. Kumar R, Chauhan A, Zhuang H, et al. Clinicopathologic factors associated with false negative FDG-PET in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006;98:267-74 (Pubitemid 44195596)
17. Avril N, Menzel M, Dose J, et al. Glucose metabolism of breast cancer assessed by 18F-FDG PET: histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis. J Nucl Med 2001;42:9-16 (Pubitemid 32104770)
18. Buck A, Schirrmeister H, Kuhn T, et al. FDG uptake in breast cancer: correlation with biological and clinical prognostic parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1317-23 (Pubitemid 44392212)
19. Westerterp M, Pruim J, Oyen W, et al. Quantification of FDG PET studies using standardised uptake values in multi-centre trials: effects of image reconstruction, resolution and ROI definition parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:392-404 (Pubitemid 46295349)
20. Boellaard R, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, et al. Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1519-27 (Pubitemid 47618506)
21. Rheingold SR, Neugut AI, Meadows AT. Secondary cancers: incidence, risk factors, and management. In: Cancer Medicine. 6th edn. Hamilton, ON: BC Decker, 2003:2623-31