Radionuclide methods and instrumentation for breast cancer detection and diagnosis

Seminars in Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 271-280

  Surti, Suleman ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SPECIFIC GAMMA IMAGING; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; GAMMA SCINTIGRAPHY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MASTECTOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PET SCANNER; PILOT STUDY; POSITRON EMISSION MAMMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RADIOFREQUENCY; SCINTIMAMMOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; WHOLE BODY SCANNER;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; RADIONUCLIDE IMAGING; ROTATION;

EID: 84878358259     PISSN: 00012998     EISSN: 15584623     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2013.03.003     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. H. Palmedo, H.J. Biersack, and S. Lastoria Scintimammography with technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile: Results of a prospective European multicentre trial Eur J Nucl Med 25 1998 375 385
2. I. Khalkhali, J. Villanueva-Meyer, and S.L. Edell Diagnostic accuracy of Tc-99m-sestamibi breast imaging: Multicenter trial results J Nucl Med 41 2000 1973 1979
3. N. Avril, J. Dose, and F. Janicke Metabolic characterization of breast tumors with positron emission tomography using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose J Clin Oncol 14 1996 1848 1857
4. D.J. Samson, C.R. Flamm, and E.D. Pisano Should FDG PET be used to decide whether a patient with an abnormal mammogram or breast finding at physical examination should undergo biopsy? Acad Radiol 9 2002 773 783
5. V.P. Jackson, R.E. Hendrick, and S.A. Feig Imaging of the radiographically dense breast Radiology 188 1993 297 301
6. E.B. Cole, E.D. Pisano, and E.O. Kistner Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: Effects of image processing and lesion type 1 Radiology 226 2003 153 160
7. T.M. Kolb, J. Lichy, and J.H. Newhouse Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations Radiology 225 2002 165 175
8. R.P. Baum, and C. Przetak Evaluation of therapy response in breast and ovarian cancer patients by positron emission tomography (PET) Q J Nucl Med 45 2001 257 268
9. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography J Clin Oncol 24 2006 5366 5372
10. I. Khalkhali, I. Mena, and E. Jouanne Prone scintimammography in patients with suspicion of carcinoma of the breast J Am Coll Surg 178 1994 491 497
11. C.H. Kao, S.J. Wang, and S.H. Yeh Tc-99m MIBI uptake in breast carcinoma and axillary lymph node metastases Clin Nucl Med 19 1994 898 900
12. R.L. Wahl, R.L. Cody, and G.D. Hutchins Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: Initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabeled glucose analogue 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose Radiology 179 1991 765 770
13. L.P. Adler, J.P. Crowe, and N.K. Al-Kaisi Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET Radiology 187 1993 743 750
14. N. Avril, C.A. Rose, and M. Schelling Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: Use and limitations J Clin Oncol 18 2000 3495 3502
15. G. Tarantola, F. Zito, and P. Gerundini PET instrumentation and reconstruction algorithms in whole-body applications J Nucl Med 44 2003 756 769
16. J.L. Humm, A. Rosenfeld, and A. Del Guerra From PET detectors to PET scanners Eur J Nucl Med 30 2003 1574 1597
17. A. Quon, and S.S. Gambhir FDG-PET and beyond: Molecular breast cancer imaging J Clin Oncol 23 2005 1664 1673
18. S. Surti, A. Kuhn, and M.E. Werner Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET/CT scanner with special consideration for its time-of-flight imaging capabilities J Nucl Med 48 2007 471 480
19. B.W. Jakoby, Y. Bercier, and M. Conti Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner Phys Med Biol 56 2011 2375 2389
20. V. Bettinardi, L. Presotto, and E. Rapisarda Physical performance of the new hybrid PET/CT discovery-690 Med Phys 38 10 2011 5394 5411
21. C.J. Thompson, K. Murthy, and I.N. Weinberg Feasibility study for positron emission mammography Med Phys 21 1994 529 538
22. J.L. Robar, C.J. Thompson, and K. Murthy Construction and calibration of detectors for high-resolution metabolic breast cancer imaging Nucl Instrum Meth A 392 1997 402 406
23. I. Weinberg, S. Majewski, and A. Weisenberger Preliminary results for positron emission mammography: Real-time functional breast imaging in a conventional mammography gantry Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 23 1996 804 806
24. Turkington TG, Majewski S, Weisenberger AG, et al. A large field of view positron emission mammography imager. Presented at 2003 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, Portland, OR, Oct 19-25, 2003
25. W.A. Berg, I.N. Weinberg, and D. Narayanan High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression ("positron emission mammography") is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer Breast J 12 2006 309 323
26. W.A. Berg, K.S. Madsen, and K. Schilling Breast cancer: Comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast Radiology 258 2011 59 72
27. M.C. Abreu, J.D. Aguiar, and F.G. Almeida Design and evaluation of the clear-PEM scanner for positron emission mammography IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 53 2006 71 77
28. Y. Wu, S.L. Bowen, and K. Yang PET characteristics of a dedicated breast PET/CT scanner prototype Phys Med Biol 54 2009 4273 4287
29. S.L. Bowen, Y. Wu, and A.J. Chaudhari Initial characterization of a dedicated breast PET/CT scanner during human imaging J Nucl Med 50 2009 1401 1408
30. R.R. Raylman, J. Abraham, and H. Hazard Initial clinical test of a breast PET scanner J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 55 2011 58 64
31. G.C. Wang, J.S. Huber, and W.W. Moses Characterization of the LBNL PEM camera IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 53 2006 1129 1135
32. L. Moliner, A.J. González, and A. Soriano Design and evaluation of the MAMMI dedicated breast PET Med Phys 39 2012 5393 5404
33. Freifelder R, Cardi C, Grigoras I, et al. First results of a dedicated breast PET imager (B-PET) using NaI(Tl) curve-plate detectors. Presented at 2001 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, San Diego, CA, Nov 04-10, 2001
34. Srinivas SM, Freifelder R, Saffer JR, et al. A dedicated breast positron emission tomography (B-PET) scanner: Characterization and pilot patient study. Presented at 2006 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, San Diego, CA, Oct 29-Nov 05, 2006
35. M. Lima, Y. Nakamoto, and S. Kanao Clinical performance of 2 dedicated PET scanners for breast imaging: Initial evaluation J Nucl Med 53 2012 1534 1542
36. J. Zhang, P.D. Olcott, and G. Chinn Study of the performance of a novel 1 mm resolution dual-panel PET camera design dedicated to breast cancer imaging using Monte Carlo simulation Med Phys 34 2007 689 702
37. S. Surti, and J.S. Karp Design considerations for a limited angle, dedicated breast, TOF PET scanner Phys Med Biol 53 2008 2911 2921
38. Krishnamoorthy S, Wiener RI, Kaul M, et al. Development of a high-resolution and depth-of-interaction capable detector for time-of-flight PET. Presented at 2011 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, Valencia, Spain, Oct 23-29, 2011
39. F. Godinez, A.J. Chaudhari, and Y. Yang Characterization of a high-resolution hybrid DOI detector for a dedicated breast PET/CT scanner Phys Med Biol 57 2012 3435 3449
40. B. Ravindranath, P.-J. Huang, and S. Junnarkar Quantitative clinical evaluation of a simultaneous PET/MRI breast imaging system J Nucl Med 53 2012 1217 [abstract]
41. B. Ravindranath, S. Junnarkar, and M. Purschke Results from a simultaneous PET-MRI breast scanner J Nucl Med 52 2011 432 [abstract]
42. Y.C. Tai, H. Wu, and D. Pal Virtual-pinhole PET J Nucl Med 49 2008 471 479
43. B. Ravindranath, J. Wen, and A. Mathews A flat panel virtual-pinhole PET insert for axillary and internal mammary lymph node imaging in breast cancer patients J Nucl Med 53 2012 432 [abstract]
44. 99mTc-sestamibi and other conventional radiopharmaceuticals in breast cancer diagnosis Semin Nucl Med 29 1999 16 40
45. 99mTc methoxyisobutylisonitrile in imaging breast cancer Semin Nucl Med 27 1997 40 54
46. S. Majewski, D. Kieper, and E. Curran Optimization of dedicated scintimammography procedure using detector prototypes and compressible phantoms IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 48 2001 822 829
47. R.F. Brem, J.A. Rapelyea, and G. Zisman Occult breast cancer: Scintimammography with high-resolution breast-specific gamma camera in women at high risk for breast cancer Radiology 237 2005 274 280
48. C.B. Hruska, S.W. Phillips, and D.H. Whaley Molecular breast imaging: Use of a dual-head dedicated gamma camera to detect small breast tumors AJR Am J Roentgenol 191 2008 1805 1815
49. D.J. Rhodes, C.B. Hruska, and S.W. Phillips Dedicated dual-head gamma imaging for breast cancer screening in women with mammographically dense breasts Radiology 258 2011 106 118
50. B. Mueller, M.K. O'Connor, and I. Blevis Evaluation of a small cadmium zinc telluride detector for scintimammography J Nucl Med 44 2003 602 609
51. M.K. O'Connor, S.W. Phillips, and C.B. Hruska Molecular breast imaging: Advantages and limitations of a scintimammographic technique in patients with small breast tumors Breast J 13 2007 3 11
52. M.B. Williams, P.G. Judy, and S. Gunn Dual-modality breast tomosynthesis Radiology 255 2010 191 198
53. M.P. Tornai, J.E. Bowsher, and R.J. Jaszczak Mammotomography with pinhole incomplete circular orbit SPECT J Nucl Med 44 2003 583 593
54. S.J. Cutler, K.L. Perez, and H.X. Barnhart Observer detection limits for a dedicated SPECT breast imaging system Phys Med Biol 55 2010 1903 1916
55. C.B. Hruska, A.L. Weinmann, and C.M.T. Skjerseth Proof of concept for low-dose molecular breast imaging with a dual-head CZT gamma camera. Part II. Evaluation in patients Med Phys 39 2012 3476 3483