Literature DB >> 12835979

Follow-up of women with breast cancer: comparison between MRI and FDG PET.

Gerhard W Goerres1, Sven C A Michel, Mathias K Fehr, Achim H Kaim, Hans C Steinert, Burkhardt Seifert, Gustav K von Schulthess, Rahel A Kubik-Huch.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare MRI of the breast with (18)F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with suspected local or regional breast cancer recurrence or suspected contralateral breast cancer. Thirty-two patients (mean age 57.2 years, age range 32-76 years) with suspected loco-regional recurrence ( n=19), chest wall recurrence ( n=5), and suspected secondary tumor of the contralateral breast ( n=8) underwent MRI of the breast and FDG PET of the whole body and breast region. Cytology/histology ( n=17) or a clinical follow-up examination ( n=15) with additional imaging served as the standard of reference. A McNemar test was performed to compare PET and MRI, and kappa was determined to quantify agreement of both methods. Sensitivity was 79 and 100%, specificity was 94 and 72%, and accuracy was 88 and 84% for MRI and PET, respectively. Additional metastases outside the field of view of MRI were found in PET in 5 patients. In this study both imaging methods had comparable accuracy. The detection of distant metastases with whole-body PET imaging can influence patient management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12835979     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-002-1720-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Radiol        ISSN: 0938-7994            Impact factor:   5.315


  24 in total

1.  Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and conventional triple assessment in locally recurrent breast cancer.

Authors:  H Mumtaz; T Davidson; M A Hall-Craggs; M Payley; K Walmsley; G Cowley; I Taylor
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 2.  MRI of the breast: state of the art.

Authors:  M Friedrich
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Comparison of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile scintimammography in the detection of breast tumours.

Authors:  H Palmedo; H Bender; F Grünwald; P Mallmann; P Zamora; D Krebs; H J Biersack
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1997-09

4.  FDG PET in head and neck cancer.

Authors:  J W Keyes; N E Watson; D W Williams; K M Greven; W F McGuirt
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Comparison of pharmacokinetic MRI and [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the diagnosis of breast cancer: initial experience.

Authors:  G Brix; M Henze; M V Knopp; R Lucht; J Doll; H Junkermann; H Hawighorst; U Haberkorn
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the irradiated breast: differentiation with dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  T H Dao; A Rahmouni; F Campana; M Laurent; B Asselain; A Fourquet
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET.

Authors:  L P Adler; J P Crowe; N K al-Kaisi; J L Sunshine
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast after limited surgery and radiation therapy.

Authors:  S H Heywang-Köbrunner; A Schlegel; R Beck; T Wendt; W Kellner; B Lommatzsch; M Untch; W B Nathrath
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1993 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.826

9.  American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on the role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer. American Society of Clinical Oncology Bisphosphonates Expert Panel.

Authors:  B E Hillner; J N Ingle; J R Berenson; N A Janjan; K S Albain; A Lipton; G Yee; J S Biermann; R T Chlebowski; D G Pfister
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Use of positron emission tomography in evaluation of brachial plexopathy in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  A Ahmad; S Barrington; M Maisey; R D Rubens
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  24 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.  [Functional and molecular imaging of breast tumors].

Authors:  K Pinker; P Brader; G Karanikas; K El-Rabadi; W Bogner; S Gruber; M Reisegger; S Trattnig; T H Helbich
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Association between serial dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic 18F-FDG PET measures in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer.

Authors:  Savannah C Partridge; Risa K Vanantwerp; Robert K Doot; Xiaoyu Chai; Brenda F Kurland; Peter R Eby; Jennifer M Specht; Lisa K Dunnwald; Erin K Schubert; Constance D Lehman; David A Mankoff
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and sonography in patients receiving primary chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  Filippo Montemurro; Laura Martincich; Giovanni De Rosa; Stefano Cirillo; Vincenzo Marra; Nicoletta Biglia; Marco Gatti; Piero Sismondi; Massimo Aglietta; Daniele Regge
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-01-27       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  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

6.  Evaluation of novel genetic algorithm generated schemes for positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) image fusion.

Authors:  K G Baum; E Schmidt; K Rafferty; A Krol; María Helguera
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 7.  Advantages and limitations of FDG PET in the follow-up of breast cancer.

Authors:  Peter Lind; Isabel Igerc; Thomas Beyer; Peter Reinprecht; Klaus Hausegger
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Associations between cancer-related information seeking and receiving PET imaging for routine cancer surveillance--an analysis of longitudinal survey data.

Authors:  Andy S L Tan; Laura Gibson; Hanna M Zafar; Stacy W Gray; Robert C Hornik; Katrina Armstrong
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  FDG-PET and other imaging modalities for the evaluation of breast cancer recurrence and metastases: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  LingLing Pan; Yuan Han; XiaoGuang Sun; JianJun Liu; Huang Gang
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 10.  PET/CT in oncology: for which tumours is it the reference standard?

Authors:  Conor D Collins
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 3.909

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.