Literature DB >> 19214522

The role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in evaluation of early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer.

Amandeep Kumar1, Rakesh Kumar, Vathalaru Seenu, Sidharatha Datta Gupta, Madhavi Chawla, Arun Malhotra, Sada Nand Mehta.   

Abstract

We evaluated the role of 18F-FDG PET/CT for the assessment of response after two cycles of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) for breast cancer. Twenty-three women with locally advanced breast cancer were included in this study. Early response to NACT was evaluated after two cycles using clinical examination, CT, and 18F-FDG PET/CT. Final histopathology following surgery after six cycles of NACT served as reference. Baseline PET/CT demonstrated a total of 26 lesions in 23 patients. The size of the primary tumor ranged from 1.90 cm to 11.60 cm, and the maximum value of the standardized uptake value of FDG (SUVmax) ranged from 3.6 to 38.6 (mean, 11.7). Post-chemotherapy PET/CT examinations were done after two cycles of NACT. The size of the primary tumor on follow-up PET/CT examinations ranged from 0.0 cm to 7.6 cm, and SUVmax ranged from 0.0 to 12.0 (mean, 3.96). On clinical, CT, and PET/CT examinations, 50% reduction in the parameters was taken as the cutoff value to differentiate between responders and non-responders. Post-NACT PET/CT demonstrated that 16 patients were responders and 7 non-responders. Among 16 responders on PET/CT scan, 14 were true positive and 2 were false positive when compared with histopathology. Among seven non-responder patients, six were true negative, and one was false negative. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PET/CT in detecting responders were 93%, 75%, and 87%, respectively. In conclusion, 18F-FDG PET/CT can differentiate responders from non-responders with high accuracy after two cycles of NACT in patients with LABC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19214522     DOI: 10.1007/s00330-009-1303-z

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


  29 in total

1.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada.

Authors:  P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2000-02-02       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  CARCINOMA OF THE BREAST-PART I; RESULTS OF TREATMENT.

Authors:  C D Haagensen; A P Stout
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1942-12       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  CARCINOMA OF THE BREAST: II. CRITERIA OF OPERABILITY.

Authors:  C D Haagensen; A P Stout
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1943-11       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Monitoring primary breast cancer throughout chemotherapy using FDG-PET.

Authors:  Garry M McDermott; Andrew Welch; Roger T Staff; Fiona J Gilbert; Lutz Schweiger; Scott I K Semple; Tim A D Smith; Andrew W Hutcheon; Iain D Miller; Ian C Smith; Steven D Heys
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy.

Authors:  I C Smith; A E Welch; A W Hutcheon; I D Miller; S Payne; F Chilcott; S Waikar; T Whitaker; A K Ah-See; O Eremin; S D Heys; F J Gilbert; P F Sharp
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer: predicting response with in vivo (1)H MR spectroscopy--a pilot study at 4 T.

Authors:  Sina Meisamy; Patrick J Bolan; Eva H Baker; Robin L Bliss; Evin Gulbahce; Lenore I Everson; Michael T Nelson; Tim H Emory; Todd M Tuttle; Douglas Yee; Michael Garwood
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Positron emission tomography studies in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer: a method for early therapy evaluation?

Authors:  T Jansson; J E Westlin; H Ahlström; A Lilja; B Långström; J Bergh
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation.

Authors:  R L Wahl; K Zasadny; M Helvie; G D Hutchins; B Weber; R Cody
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy using PET with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in breast cancer.

Authors:  P Bassa; E E Kim; T Inoue; F C Wong; M Korkmaz; D J Yang; W H Wong; K W Hicks; A U Buzdar; D A Podoloff
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 10.  Can positron emission tomography (PET) be used to detect subclinical response to cancer therapy? The EC PET Oncology Concerted Action and the EORTC PET Study Group.

Authors:  P Price; T Jones
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 9.162

View more
  27 in total

1.  Early monitoring of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer with 18F-FDG PET/CT: defining a clinical aim.

Authors:  David Groheux; Sylvie Giacchetti; Marc Espié; Domenico Rubello; Jean-luc Moretti; Elif Hindié
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 2.  Present and future role of FDG-PET/CT imaging in the management of breast cancer.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Kitajima; Yasuo Miyoshi
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 2.374

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

Review 4.  Metabolic positron emission tomography imaging in cancer detection and therapy response.

Authors:  Aizhi Zhu; Daniel Lee; Hyunsuk Shim
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 5.  Monitoring cancer therapy with PET: probably effective, but more research is needed.

Authors:  Giovanni Lucignani
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 6.  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

Review 7.  ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in the early prediction of pathological response in aggressive subtypes of breast cancer: review of the literature and recommendations for use in clinical trials.

Authors:  David Groheux; David Mankoff; Marc Espié; Elif Hindié
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Comparison of the diagnostic performance of response evaluation criteria in solid tumor 1.0 with response evaluation criteria in solid tumor 1.1 on MRI in advanced breast cancer response evaluation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Su Kyung Jeh; Sung Hun Kim; Bong Joo Kang
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 3.500

9.  The role of chemotherapeutic drugs in the evaluation of breast tumour response to chemotherapy using serial FDG-PET.

Authors:  Michal E Schneider-Kolsky; Stewart Hart; Jane Fox; Peter Midolo; John Stuckey; Michael Hofman; Vinod Ganju
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-06-21       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  Comparison of PET metabolic indices for the early assessment of tumour response in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated by polychemotherapy.

Authors:  Jacques-Antoine Maisonobe; Camilo A Garcia; Hatem Necib; Bruno Vanderlinden; Alain Hendlisz; Patrick Flamen; Irène Buvat
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-11-14       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.