BACKGROUND: Recently PET is emerged as a method to estimate the response of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in advanced breast cancer. This study is aimed to estimate the predictive role of PET CT and other imaging modalities (ultrasound, MRI) through NAC. METHODS: PET CT was acquired before and after NAC from 41 patients. Pathologic results were classified as pathological complete response (pCR) and non-pCR. The results of clinical responses were assessed with imaging indexes (postTx, postchemotherapy size or peak standardized uptake values (pSUV); delta, the size difference between treatment; RR, reduction rate of tumor size or pSUV), and they were compared with pathologic results. RESULTS: Seven patients (17.1%) showed pCR. As a result of comparison of the image index, all image indexes of MRI were predictive for pCR (P < 0.05). In contrast, only delta and RR of US, RR of PET CT were significant. The area under curve of delta and RR in MRI were higher (0.91, 0.90) than US (0.83, 0.80) and PET CT (0.62, 0.72). The MRI is superior to the US or PET CT. CONCLUSIONS: We have concluded that the MRI is better than PET CT for monitoring the effect of NAC in advanced breast cancer. J. Surg. Oncol. 2010;102:392-397.
BACKGROUND: Recently PET is emerged as a method to estimate the response of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in advanced breast cancer. This study is aimed to estimate the predictive role of PET CT and other imaging modalities (ultrasound, MRI) through NAC. METHODS: PET CT was acquired before and after NAC from 41 patients. Pathologic results were classified as pathological complete response (pCR) and non-pCR. The results of clinical responses were assessed with imaging indexes (postTx, postchemotherapy size or peak standardized uptake values (pSUV); delta, the size difference between treatment; RR, reduction rate of tumor size or pSUV), and they were compared with pathologic results. RESULTS: Seven patients (17.1%) showed pCR. As a result of comparison of the image index, all image indexes of MRI were predictive for pCR (P < 0.05). In contrast, only delta and RR of US, RR of PET CT were significant. The area under curve of delta and RR in MRI were higher (0.91, 0.90) than US (0.83, 0.80) and PET CT (0.62, 0.72). The MRI is superior to the US or PET CT. CONCLUSIONS: We have concluded that the MRI is better than PET CT for monitoring the effect of NAC in advanced breast cancer. J. Surg. Oncol. 2010;102:392-397.
Authors: Sara Sheikhbahaei; Tyler J Trahan; Jennifer Xiao; Mehdi Taghipour; Esther Mena; Roisin M Connolly; Rathan M Subramaniam Journal: Oncologist Date: 2016-07-08
Authors: Kenneth E Pengel; Bas B Koolen; Claudette E Loo; Wouter V Vogel; Jelle Wesseling; Esther H Lips; Emiel J Th Rutgers; Renato A Valdés Olmos; Marie Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Xia Li; Richard G Abramson; Lori R Arlinghaus; Anuradha Bapsi Chakravarthy; Vandana Abramson; Ingrid Mayer; Jaime Farley; Dominique Delbeke; Thomas E Yankeelov Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2012-11-16 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Michael L Marinovich; Petra Macaskill; Les Irwig; Francesco Sardanelli; Eleftherios Mamounas; Gunter von Minckwitz; Valentina Guarneri; Savannah C Partridge; Frances C Wright; Jae Hyuck Choi; Madhumita Bhattacharyya; Laura Martincich; Eren Yeh; Viviana Londero; Nehmat Houssami Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 4.430