Literature DB >> 12381687

Pre-operative staging of invasive breast cancer with MR mammography and/or PET: boon or bunk?

A Rieber1, H Schirrmeister, A Gabelmann, K Nuessle, S Reske, R Kreienberg, H J Brambs, T Kuehn.   

Abstract

This study compared pre-operative staging with MR mammography (MRM) and positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with clinically suspected breast cancer according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, category 5. A total of 43 patients with breast cancer were examined. MRM included both T(2) weighted turbo spin echo sequences and T(1) weighted gradient echo sequences (three-dimensional fast low angle shot) before and after application of gadolinium-DPTA. All patients then underwent examination with a modern full-ring PET scanner following injection of fluorodeoxyglucose. We evaluated the efficacy of these methods in the diagnosis of primary tumour, contralateral carcinomas, bifocal, trifocal or multifocal disease, as well as non-invasive cancer portions and tumour size. Determination of patients' N-status was only attempted using PET. All findings were validated by histological examination. MRM was slightly superior to PET in several areas, such as in the respective methods' sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivities for MRM and PET were: 100% vs 93.0% in diagnosis of the primary tumour; 100% vs 100% in diagnosis of contralateral carcinomas; and 95.2% vs 92.5% in diagnosis of bifocal, trifocal or multifocal disease. Specificities for MRM and PET were: 100% vs 97.5% in diagnosis of contralateral carcinomas; and 96.8% vs 90.3% in diagnosis of bifocal, trifocal or multifocal disease. Non-invasive cancer portions and tumour sizes were equally well determined with both methods. The sensitivity of PET for detection of lymph node involvement was 80% and specificity 95%. MRM and PET were superior to conventional methods in nearly all areas studied; the findings of one or both of the methods impacted positively on patients' surgical treatment in 12.5-15% of cases. Pre-operative MRM and/or PET can have a positive influence on surgical treatment planning. Therefore, it appears useful to perform pre-operative staging with MRM or PET in these patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12381687     DOI: 10.1259/bjr.75.898.750789

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  10 in total

Review 1.  PET/CT and breast cancer.

Authors:  Barbara Zangheri; Cristina Messa; Maria Picchio; Luigi Gianolli; Claudio Landoni; Ferruccio Fazio
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-05-05       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Molecular Imaging in Breast Cancer - Potential Future Aspects.

Authors:  Katja Pinker; Wolfgang Bogner; Stephan Gruber; Peter Brader; Siegfried Trattnig; Georgios Karanikas; Thomas H Helbich
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2011-04-29       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Design study of a high-resolution breast-dedicated PET system built from cadmium zinc telluride detectors.

Authors:  Hao Peng; Craig S Levin
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Algorithm-based method for detection of blood vessels in breast MRI for development of computer-aided diagnosis.

Authors:  Muqing Lin; Jeon-Hor Chen; Ke Nie; Daniel Chang; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 5.  A systematic review of FDG-PET in breast cancer.

Authors:  S Escalona; J A Blasco; M M Reza; E Andradas; N Gómez
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 6.  FDG-PET for axillary lymph node staging in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  Flavio Crippa; Alberto Gerali; Alessandra Alessi; Roberto Agresti; Emilio Bombardieri
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-05-05       Impact factor: 9.236

7.  Prediction of malignant breast lesions from MRI features: a comparison of artificial neural network and logistic regression techniques.

Authors:  Christine E McLaren; Wen-Pin Chen; Ke Nie; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2009-05-05       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Evaluation of tissue sampling methods used for MRI-detected contralateral breast lesions in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6667 trial.

Authors:  Wendy B DeMartini; Lucy Hanna; Constantine Gatsonis; Mary C Mahoney; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Breast cancer detection using high-resolution breast PET compared to whole-body PET or PET/CT.

Authors:  Judith E Kalinyak; Wendie A Berg; Kathy Schilling; Kathleen S Madsen; Deepa Narayanan; Marie Tartar
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Quantitative analysis of lesion morphology and texture features for diagnostic prediction in breast MRI.

Authors:  Ke Nie; Jeon-Hor Chen; Hon J Yu; Yong Chu; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.173

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.