18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake predicts pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: A retrospective cohort study

Journal of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 107, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 180-187

  Jin, Soyoung ^a   Kim, Sung Bae ^a   Ahn, Jin Hee ^a   Jung, Kyung Hae ^a   Ahn, Sei Hyun ^a   Son, Byung Ho ^a   Lee, Jong Won ^a   Gong, Gyungyub ^a   Kim, Hye Ok ^a   Moon, Dae Hyuk ^a  

^a University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

breast; carcinoma; ductal; fluorodeoxyglucose F18; neoadjuvant therapy; pathological complete response; positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; KI 67 ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CELL PROLIFERATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PATHOLOGICAL COMPLETE RESPONSE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ADULT; AGED; ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MASTECTOMY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEOADJUVANT THERAPY; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84872276295     PISSN: 00224790     EISSN: 10969098     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jso.23255     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Kaufmann M, Hortobagyi GN, Goldhirsch A, et al.: Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: An update. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 1940-1949.
2. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, et al.: Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 2019-2027.
3. Heller W, Mazhar D, Ward R, et al.: Neoadjuvant 5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy followed by docetaxel in refractory patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Oncol Rep 2007; 17: 253-259.
4. Dieras V, Fumoleau P, Romieu G, et al.: Randomized parallel study of doxorubicin plus paclitaxel and doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide as neoadjuvant treatment of patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 4958-4965.
5. Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al.: Preoperative chemotherapy: Updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 778-785.
6. Guarneri V, Broglio K, Kau SW, et al.: Prognostic value of pathologic complete response after primary chemotherapy in relation to hormone receptor status and other factors. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 1037-1044.
7. von Minckwitz G, Raab G, Caputo A, et al.: Doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 21 days compared with doxorubicin and docetaxel every 14 days as preoperative treatment in operable breast cancer: The GEPARDUO study of the German Breast Group. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 2676-2685.
8. Cristofanilli M, Gonzalez-Angulo A, Sneige N, et al.: Invasive lobular carcinoma classic type: Response to primary chemotherapy and survival outcomes. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 41-48.
9. Keam B, Im SA, Lee KH, et al.: Ki-67 can be used for further classification of triple negative breast cancer into two subtypes with different response and prognosis. Breast Cancer Res 2011; 13: R22.
10. Keam B, Im SA, Kim HJ, et al.: Prognostic impact of clinicopathologic parameters in stage II/III breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant docetaxel and doxorubicin chemotherapy: Paradoxical features of the triple negative breast cancer. BMC Cancer 2007; 7: 203.
11. Kim SI, Sohn J, Koo JS, et al.: Molecular subtypes and tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Oncology 2010; 79: 324-330.
12. Warburg O:, On the origin of cancer cells. Science 1956; 123: 309-314.
13. DeBerardinis RJ, Lum JJ, Hatzivassiliou G, et al.: The biology of cancer: Metabolic reprogramming fuels cell growth and proliferation. Cell Metab 2008; 7: 11-20.
14. Ramanathan A, Wang C, Schreiber SL:, Perturbational profiling of a cell-line model of tumorigenesis by using metabolic measurements. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005; 102: 5992-5997.
15. Gordan JD, Thompson CB, Simon MC:, HIF and c-Myc: Sibling rivals for control of cancer cell metabolism and proliferation. Cancer Cell 2007; 12: 108-113.
16. Manning BD, Cantley LC:, AKT/PKB signaling: Navigating downstream. Cell 2007; 129: 1261-1274.
17. Shaw RJ:, Glucose metabolism and cancer. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2006; 18: 598-608.
18. Bensaad K, Tsuruta A, Selak MA, et al.: TIGAR, a p53-inducible regulator of glycolysis and apoptosis. Cell 2006; 126: 107-120.
19. Vander Heiden MG, Cantley LC, Thompson CB:, Understanding the Warburg effect: The metabolic requirements of cell proliferation. Science 2009; 324: 1029-1033.
20. 18F-FDG uptake in lung, breast, and colon cancers: Molecular biology correlates and disease characterization. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 1820-1827.
21. Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Moretti JL, et al.: Correlation of high (18)F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 426-435.
22. Mankoff DA, Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, et al.: Changes in blood flow and metabolism in locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 1806-1814.
23. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 535-541.
24. Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N, et al.: Histological grading of breast carcinomas: A study of interobserver agreement. Hum Pathol 1995; 26: 873-879.
25. Kim MJ, Ro JY, Ahn SH, et al.: Clinicopathologic significance of the basal-like subtype of breast cancer: A comparison with hormone receptor and Her2/neu-overexpressing phenotypes. Hum Pathol 2006; 37: 1217-1226.
26. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, et al.: Strategies for subtypes-dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: Highlights of the St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1736-1747.
27. Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, et al.: A new histological grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: Prognostic significance and survival. Breast 2003; 12: 320-327.
28. Son BH, Kwak BS, Kim JK, et al.: Changing patterns in the clinical characteristics of Korean patients with breast cancer during the last 15 years. Arch Surg 2006; 141: 155-160.
29. Tan MC, Al Mushawah F, Gao F, et al.: Predictors of complete pathological response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer. Am J Surg 2009; 198: 520-525.
30. Ring AE, Smith IE, Ashley S, et al.: Oestrogen receptor status, pathological complete response and prognosis in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2004; 91: 2012-2017.
31. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 5366-5372.
32. Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, et al.: Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy- D -glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 1676-1688.
33. Hess KR, Anderson K, Symmans WF, et al.: Pharmacogenomic predictor of sensitivity to preoperative chemotherapy with paclitaxel and fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 4236-4244.
34. Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al.: Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: A retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 55-65.
35. 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 1426-1431.
36. Bos R, van Der Hoeven JJ, van Der Wall E, et al.: Biologic correlates of (18)fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 379-387.
37. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al.: A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2004; 351: 2817-2826.
38. Benini E, Rao S, Daidone MG, et al.: Immunoreactivity to MIB-1 in breast cancer: methodological assessment and comparison with other proliferation indices. Cell Prolif 1997; 30: 107-115.
39. Iqbal S, Anderson TJ, Marson LP, et al.: MIB-1 assessments in breast cancers. Breast 2002; 11: 252-256.
40. 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: 1519-1527.
41. 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.
42. Cuzick J, Dowsett M, Pineda S, et al.: Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 4273-4278.