Clinical performance of 2 dedicated PET scanners for breast imaging: initial evaluation

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 53, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 1534-1542

  Iima, Mami ^a   Nakamoto, Yuji ^a   Kanao, Shotaro ^a   Sugie, Tomoharu ^a   Ueno, Takayuki ^a   Kawada, Mayumi ^a   Mikami, Yoshiki ^a   Toi, Masakazu ^a   Togashi, Kaori ^a  

^a KYOTO UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

18F FDG; Breast cancer; Dedicated; PET CT; Positron emission mammography (PEM)

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST ADENOMA; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER GRADING; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; INVASIVE CARCINOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR VOLUME; WHOLE BODY SCANNER;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84867074274     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.111.100958     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Siegel R, Ward E, Brawley O, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2011. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61:212-236.
2. Tabár L, Vitak B, Chen HHT, Yen MF, Duffy SW, Smith RA. Beyond randomized controlled trials. Cancer. 2001;91:1724-1731.
3. Wahl R, Cody R, Hutchins G, Mudgett E. Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabeled glucose analogue 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology. 1991;179:765-770.
4. Adler L, Crowe J, Al-Kaisi N, Sunshine J. Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET. Radiology. 1993;187:743-750. (Pubitemid 23155705)
5. Avril N, Dose J, Janicke F, et al. Metabolic characterization of breast tumors with positron emission tomography using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:1848-1857. (Pubitemid 26185460)
6. Escalona S, Blasco J, Reza M, Andradas E, Gomez N. A systematic review of FDG-PET in breast cancer. Med Oncol. 2010;27:114-129.
7. Scheidhauer K, Walter C, Seemann M. FDG PET and other imaging modalities in the primary diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:S70-79. (Pubitemid 38833035)
8. Levine EA, Freimanis RI, Perrier ND, et al. Positron emission mammography: initial clinical results. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:86-91.
9. Freifelder R, Karp JS. Dedicated PET scanners for breast imaging. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42:2463-2480. (Pubitemid 28015569)
10. Raylman RR, Majewski S, Smith MF, et al. Comparison of scintillators for positron emission mammography (PEM) systems. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2003;50:42-49.
11. Bowen SL, Wu Y, Chaudhari AJ, et al. Initial characterization of a dedicated breast PET/CT scanner during human imaging. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1401-1408.
12. Rosen EL, Turkington TG, Soo MS, Baker JA, Coleman RE. Detection of primary breast carcinoma with a dedicated, large-field-of-view FDG PET mammography device: initial experience. Radiology. 2005;234:527-534. (Pubitemid 40139925)
13. MacDonald L, Edwards J, Lewellen T, Haseley D, Rogers J, Kinahan P. Clinical imaging characteristics of the positron emission mammography camera: PEM Flex Solo II. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1666-1675.
14. Raylman RR, Majewski S, Smith MF, et al. The positron emission mammography/ tomography breast imaging and biopsy system (PEM/PET): design, construction and phantom-based measurements. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53: 637-653. (Pubitemid 351496210)
15. Tai YC, Wu H, Pal D, O'Sullivan JA. Virtual-pinhole PET. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:471-479. (Pubitemid 351355214)
16. Berg WA, Weinberg IN, 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. (Pubitemid 43989975)
17. Berg WA, Madsen KS, 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.
18. Schilling K, Narayanan D, Kalinyak JE, et al. Positron emission mammography in breast cancer presurgical planning: comparisons with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:23-36.
19. Nakamoto Y, Ishizu K, Kanao S, Kawai K, Togashi K. Clinical imaging characteristics of the newly developed PET scanner for breast imaging [abstract]. J Nucl Med. 2010;51(suppl 2):220P.
20. Furuta M, Kitamura K, Ohi J, et al. Basic evaluation of a C-shaped breast PET scanner. Proc IEEE Nuc Sci Symp Conf Rec. 2009;2548-2552.
21. Nakayama T, Kudo H. Derivation and implementation of ordered-subsets algorithms for list-mode PET data. Proc IEEE Nuc Sci Symp Conf Rec. 2005;5.
22. Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kuhl CK, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS: Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.
23. Avril N, Rose C, Schelling M, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:3495-3502.
24. Eby PR, DeMartini WB, Gutierrez RL, Saini MH, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Characteristics of probably benign breast MRI lesions. AJR. 2009;193:861-867.
25. Tavassoli FA, Devilee P. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours: Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Breast and Female Genital Organs. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2003.
26. Thompson C, Murthy K, Weinberg I, Mako F. Feasibility study for positron emission mammography. Med Phys. 1994;21:529-538. (Pubitemid 24129931)
27. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission mammography in the surgical management of breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2005;190:628-632.
28. 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.
29. Yu L, YangW, Cai X, Shi D, Fan Y, Lu H. Centrally necrotizing carcinoma of the breast: clinicopathological analysis of 33 cases indicating its basal-like phenotype and poor prognosis. Histopathology. 2010;57:193-201.
30. Jimenez RE, Wallis T, Visscher DW. Centrally necrotizing carcinomas of the breast: a distinct histologic subtype with aggressive clinical behavior. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:331-337. (Pubitemid 32174202)
31. Narayanan D, Madsen KS, Kalinyak JE, Berg WA. Interpretation of positron emission mammography: feature analysis and rates of malignancy. AJR. 2011;196:956-970.
32. Basu S, Alavi A. Partial volume correction of standardized uptake values and the dual time point in FDG-PET imaging: should these be routinely employed in assessing patients with cancer? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1527-1529. (Pubitemid 47476924)