Is [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose uptake by the primary tumor a prognostic factor in breast cancer?

Breast

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 39-43

  De Cicco, Concetta ^a   Gilardi, Laura ^a   Botteri, Edoardo ^a,b   Fracassi, Silvia L V ^a   Di Dia, Giuseppina A ^a   Botta, Francesca ^a   Prisco, Gennaro ^a   Lombardo, Dario ^a   Rotmensz, Nicole ^a   Veronesi, Umberto ^a   Paganelli, Giovanni ^a  

^a EUROPEAN INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

Author keywords

Biological markers; Breast cancer; FDG uptake; PET CT; Prognosis; SUV

Indexed keywords

EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; KI 67 ANTIGEN; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER SURVIVAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; HUMAN; ISOTOPE LABELING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PRIMARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TUMOR VOLUME; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER GRADING; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; METABOLISM; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; SCINTISCANNING; SURVIVAL; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TUMOR BURDEN; TUMOR MARKERS, BIOLOGICAL;

EID: 84871715926     PISSN: 09609776     EISSN: 15323080     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2012.05.009     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Jemal A., Siegel R., Ward E., Murray T., Xu J., Thun M.J., et al. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin 2007, 57(1):43-66.
2. Ferlay J., Parkin D.M., Steliarova-Foucher E. Estimates of cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2008. Eur J Cancer 2010, 46(4):765-781.
3. Veronesi U., Zurrida S., Goldhirsch A., Rotmensz N., Viale G. Breast cancer classification: time for a change. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27(15):2427-2428.
4. Saimura M., Fukutomi T., Tsuda H., Sato H., Miyamoto K., Akashi-Tanaka S., et al. Prognosis of a series of 763 consecutive node-negative invasive breast cancer patients without adjuvant therapy: analysis of clinicopathological prognostic factor. J Surg Oncol 1999, 71(2):101-105.
5. Goldhirsch A., Ingle J.N., Gelber R.D., Coates A.S., Thürlimann B., Senn H.J. Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2009. Ann Oncol 2009, 20(8):1319-1329.
6. Hodgson N.C., Gulenchyn K.Y. Is there a role for positron emission tomography in breast cancer staging?. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26(5):712-720.
7. Wahl R.L., Zasadny K., Helvie M., Hutchins G.D., Weber B., Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol 1993, 11(11):2101-2111.
8. Avril N., Sassen S., Roylance R. Response to therapy in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2009, 50(Suppl. 1):S55-S63.
9. 18F] FDG-PET after chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: prognostic value as compared with histopathology. Ann Oncol 2008, 19(9):1573-1577.
10. 18F]-D-glucose. Cancer 1998, 82(11):2227-2234.
11. 18F-FDG PET and conventional imaging for predicting outcome in previously treated breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2002, 43(3):325-329.
12. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for outcome prediction in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27(20):3303-3311.
13. 18F] FDG-PET in operable breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2010, 17(1):247-253.
14. Veronesi U., De Cicco C., Galimberti V.E., Fernandez J.R., Rotmensz N., Viale G., et al. A comparative study on the value of FDG-PET and sentinel node biopsy to identify occult axillary metastases. Ann Oncol 2007, 18(3):473-478.
15. Wahl R.L., Jacene H., Kasamon Y., Lodge M.A. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009, 50(Suppl. 1):S122-S150.
16. Durrleman S., Simon R. Flexible regression models with cubic splines. Stat Med 1989, 8:551-561.
17. Perou C., Sorlie T., Elsen M.B., van de Rijn M., Jeffrey S.S., Rees C.A., et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000, 406:747-752.
18. Reed W., Hannisdal E., Boehler P.J., Gundersen S., Host H., Marthin J. The prognostic value of p53 and c-erb B-2 immunostaining is overrated for patients with lymph node negative breast carcinoma: a multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in 613 patients with a follow-up of 14-30 years. Cancer 2000, 88(4):804-813.
19. Rakha E.A., Reis-Filho J.S., Baehner F., Dabbs D.J., Decker T., Eusebi V., et al. Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res 2010, 12(4):207.
20. Aleskandarany M.A., Rakha E.A., Macmillan R.D., Powe D.G., Ellis I.O., Green A.R. MIB1/Ki-67 labelling index can classify grade 2 breast cancer into two clinically distinct subgroups. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011, 127(3):591-599.
21. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and prognostic parameters in breast cancer. Br J Surg 2009, 96(2):166-170.
22. Nakajo M., Kajiya Y., Kaneko T., Kaneko Y., Takasaki T., Tani A., et al. FDG PET/CT and diffusion-weighted imaging for breast cancer: prognostic value of maximum standardized uptake values and apparent diffusion coefficient values of the primary lesion. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010 Nov, 37(11):2011-2020.
23. Heudel P., Cimarelli S., Montella A., Bouteille C., Mognetti T. Value of PET-FDG in primary breast cancer based on histopathological and immunohistochemical prognostic factors. Int J Clin Oncol 2010 Dec, 15(6):588-593.
24. Buck A., Schirrmeister H., Kühn T., Shen C., Kalker T., Kotzerke J., et al. FDG uptake in breast cancer: correlation with biological and clinical prognostic parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002, 29(10):1317-1323.
25. 18F-FDG PET: histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis. J Nucl Med 2001, 42(1):9-16.
26. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose 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(10):1429-1434.
27. Shimoda W., Hayashi M., Murakami K., Oyama T., Sunagawa M. The relationship between FDG uptake in PET scans and biological behavior in breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2007, 14(3):260-268.
28. 18F-FDG PET/CT) in primary breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2008, 38(4):250-258.
29. 18F-FDG uptake and tumor aggressiveness in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2010, 51(8):1191-1197.
30. 18F]2-Deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004, 130(5):273-278.
31. Basu S., Chen W., Tchou J., Mavi A., Cermik T., Czerniecki B., et al. Comparison of triple-negative and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma using quantitative fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose/positron emission tomography imaging parameters: a potentially useful method for disease characterization. Cancer 2008, 112(5):995-1000.
32. 18F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011 Mar, 38(3):426-435.