Literature DB >> 17592153

Fusion of metabolic function and morphology: sequential [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography studies yield new insights into the natural history of bone metastases in breast cancer.

Yong Du1, Ian Cullum, Tim M Illidge, Peter J Ell.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: By monitoring bone metastases with sequential [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography ([(18)F]FDG-PET/CT) imaging, this study investigates the clinical relevance of [(18)F]FDG uptake features of bone metastases with various radiographic appearances. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Bone metastases were found in 67 of 408 consecutive patients with known/suspected recurrent breast cancer on [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT, characterized by CT morphology changes and/or bony [(18)F]FDG uptake. Twenty-five of the patients had sequential [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT examinations (86 studies) over an average follow-up period of 23 months. The temporal changes in [(18)F]FDG uptake and corresponding CT morphology features of 146 bone lesions identified in these 25 patients were followed up and correlated with therapeutic outcome retrospectively.
RESULTS: The 146 lesions were classified as osteolytic (77), osteoblastic (41), mixed-pattern (11), or no change/negative (17) on CT. The majority of the osteolytic (72; 93.5%) and mixed-pattern lesions (nine; 81.8%), but fewer of the osteoblastic lesions (25; 61%), showed increased [(18)F]FDG uptake. After treatment, 58 osteolytic lesions (80.5%) became [(18)F]FDG negative and osteoblastic on CT and only 14 relatively large lesions (19.5%) remained [(18)F]FDG avid. Of the 25 [(18)F]FDG-avid osteoblastic lesions, 13 (52%) became [(18)F]FDG negative, but 12 (48%) remained [(18)F]FDG avid and increased in size on CT. Five of the mixed-pattern lesions remained [(18)F]FDG avid after treatment. All 17 CT-negative lesions became [(18)F]FDG negative; however, nine of them became osteoblastic. None of the initially [(18)F]FDG-negative lesions showed [(18)F]FDG avidity during follow-up.
CONCLUSION: [(18)F]FDG uptake reflects the immediate tumor activity of bone metastases, whereas the radiographic morphology changes vary greatly with time among patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17592153     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.2854

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  36 in total

1.  [11C]Choline PET/CT detection of bone metastases in patients with PSA progression after primary treatment for prostate cancer: comparison with bone scintigraphy.

Authors:  Maria Picchio; Elena Giulia Spinapolice; Federico Fallanca; Cinzia Crivellaro; Giampiero Giovacchini; Luigi Gianolli; Cristina Messa
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Can FDG PET/CT monitor the response to hormonal therapy in breast cancer patients?

Authors:  Laura Evangelista; Domenico Rubello; Giorgio Saladini
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Assessment of response to endocrine therapy using FDG PET/CT in metastatic breast cancer: a pilot study.

Authors:  Nina Mortazavi-Jehanno; Anne-Laure Giraudet; Laurence Champion; Florence Lerebours; Elise Le Stanc; Veronique Edeline; Olivier Madar; Dominique Bellet; Alain Paul Pecking; Jean-Louis Alberini
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 4.  Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in Oncology.

Authors:  Andrea Gallamini; Colette Zwarthoed; Anna Borra
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2014-09-29       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 5.  Role of positron emission tomography for the monitoring of response to therapy in breast cancer.

Authors:  Olivier Humbert; Alexandre Cochet; Bruno Coudert; Alina Berriolo-Riedinger; Salim Kanoun; François Brunotte; Pierre Fumoleau
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2015-01-05

6.  Appearance of untreated bone metastases from breast cancer on FDG PET/CT: importance of histologic subtype.

Authors:  Brittany Z Dashevsky; Debra A Goldman; Molly Parsons; Mithat Gönen; Adriana D Corben; Maxine S Jochelson; Clifford A Hudis; Monica Morrow; Gary A Ulaner
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 7.  MRI for response assessment in metastatic bone disease.

Authors:  F E Lecouvet; A Larbi; V Pasoglou; P Omoumi; B Tombal; N Michoux; J Malghem; R Lhommel; B C Vande Berg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  A prospective study of bone tumor response assessment in metastatic breast cancer.

Authors:  Naoki Hayashi; Colleen M Costelloe; Tsuyoshi Hamaoka; Caimiao Wei; Naoki Niikura; Richard L Theriault; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; John E Madewell; Naoto T Ueno
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 9.  PET and PET/CT imaging of skeletal metastases.

Authors:  Gary J R Cook
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2010-07-19       Impact factor: 3.909

10.  Tumour response interpretation with new tumour response criteria vs the World Health Organisation criteria in patients with bone-only metastatic breast cancer.

Authors:  T Hamaoka; C M Costelloe; J E Madewell; P Liu; D A Berry; R Islam; R L Theriault; G N Hortobagyi; N T Ueno
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-01-26       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.