Literature DB >> 11197987

Glucose metabolism of breast cancer assessed by 18F-FDG PET: histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis.

N Avril1, M Menzel, J Dose, M Schelling, W Weber, F Jänicke, W Nathrath, M Schwaiger.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Breast cancer is characterized by elevated glucose consumption resulting in increased uptake of 18F-FDG. However, tracer uptake varies considerably among tumors imaged with PET. This study compared histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis of breast carcinomas with preoperative FDG uptake assessed by PET to identify tumor characteristics that define the degree of tracer accumulation.
METHODS: FDG uptake in breast tumors was quantified by calculating standardized uptake values (SUVs) corrected for partial-volume effect and normalized to blood glucose level at the time of tracer injection. The histologic sections of 50 invasive and 6 noninvasive breast carcinomas were analyzed for histologic type, microscopic tumor growth pattern, percentage of tumor cells, presence of inflammatory cells, density of blood vessels, histopathologic grading, tumor cell proliferation (mitotic rate and antibody binding of MIB-1), expression of estrogen and progesterone receptors, and expression of the glucose transporter protein Glut-1.
RESULTS: A positive correlation was found between FDG uptake and histologic tumor type (ductal vs. lobular; P = 0.003), microscopic tumor growth pattern (nodular vs. diffuse; P = 0.007), and tumor cell proliferation (MIB-1; P = 0.009). Tumors with diffuse growth patterns had significantly lower SUVs compared with clearly defined tumors. A weak relationship was found between FDG uptake and the percentage of tumor cells (P = 0.06). Lower densities of blood vessels corresponded to higher FDG uptakes (P = 0.08). However, even significant correlations showed poor correlation coefficients. No relationship was found between FDG uptake and the following: tumor size; axillary lymph node status; percentage of necrotic, fibrotic, and cystic compounds; presence of inflammatory cells; steroid receptor status; and expression of Glut-1.
CONCLUSION: Histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis was unable to sufficiently explain the variation of FDG uptake in breast cancer. The degree of metabolic changes after malignant transformation is most likely explained by a complex interaction between cellular energy demand and tumoral microenvironment. Therefore, FDG PET imaging may not be used to estimate tumor biologic behavior of breast cancer such as differentiation, histopathologic grading, cell proliferation, or axillary lymph node status.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11197987

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  123 in total

1.  Investigation of 18F-FDG PET in the selection of patients with breast cancer as candidates for sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant therapy.

Authors:  Laura Gilardi; Concetta De Cicco; Marco Colleoni; Anna Cardillo; Emilia Montagna; Silvia Dellapasqua; Viviana Galimberti; Vincenzo Bagnardi; Giovanni Paganelli
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Super-SILAC mix for quantitative proteomics of human tumor tissue.

Authors:  Tamar Geiger; Juergen Cox; Pawel Ostasiewicz; Jacek R Wisniewski; Matthias Mann
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2010-04-04       Impact factor: 28.547

3.  Physical effects of mechanical design parameters on photon sensitivity and spatial resolution performance of a breast-dedicated PET system.

Authors:  V C Spanoudaki; F W Y Lau; A Vandenbroucke; C S Levin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 4.  Current and future use of positron emission tomography (PET) in breast cancer.

Authors:  David A Mankoff; William B Eubank
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.673

5.  Study of the performance of a novel 1 mm resolution dual-panel PET camera design dedicated to breast cancer imaging using Monte Carlo simulation.

Authors:  Jin Zhang; Peter D Olcott; Garry Chinn; Angela M K Foudray; Craig S Levine
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  18F-FDG uptake in breast cancer correlates with immunohistochemically defined subtypes.

Authors:  Hye Ryoung Koo; Jeong Seon Park; Keon Wook Kang; Nariya Cho; Jung Min Chang; Min Sun Bae; Won Hwa Kim; Su Hyun Lee; Mi Young Kim; Jin You Kim; Mirinae Seo; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-10-05       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Can dedicated breast PET help to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment by differentiating between indolent and potentially aggressive ductal carcinoma in situ?

Authors:  Lucía Graña-López; Michel Herranz; Inés Domínguez-Prado; Sonia Argibay; Ángeles Villares; Manuel Vázquez-Caruncho
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  An integrative bioinformatics analysis identified miR-375 as a candidate key regulator of malignant breast cancer.

Authors:  Jiaxuan Liu; Ping Wang; Ping Zhang; Xinyu Zhang; Hang Du; Qiang Liu; Bo Huang; Caiyun Qian; Shuhua Zhang; Weifeng Zhu; Xiaohong Yang; Yingqun Xiao; Zhuoqi Liu; Daya Luo
Journal:  J Appl Genet       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Metabolic assessment of gliomas using 11C-methionine, [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose, and 11C-choline positron-emission tomography.

Authors:  T Kato; J Shinoda; N Nakayama; K Miwa; A Okumura; H Yano; S Yoshimura; T Maruyama; Y Muragaki; T Iwama
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2008-04-03       Impact factor: 3.825

10.  Comparison of diffuse optical tomography of human breast with whole-body and breast-only positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Soren D Konecky; Regine Choe; Alper Corlu; Kijoon Lee; Rony Wiener; Shyam M Srinivas; Janet R Saffer; Richard Freifelder; Joel S Karp; Nassim Hajjioui; Fred Azar; Arjun G Yodh
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.