Literature DB >> 21785049

Positron emission mammography: correlation of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and 18F-FDG.

Carolyn L Wang1, Lawrence R MacDonald, James V Rogers, Aleksandr Aravkin, David R Haseley, J David Beatty.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess the correlation between (18)F-FDG uptake values on positron emission mammography (PEM), expressed as maximum uptake value and lesion-to-background ratio, and receptor status (i.e., estrogen receptor [ER], progesterone receptor [PR], and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2]), tumor histology, and tumor grade. We also evaluated for the correlation between maximum uptake value on PEM and maximum uptake value on a whole-body PET/CT.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our database for patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer who were referred for PEM between June 2007 and September 2009. A subset of patients also underwent a whole-body PET/CT scan. The original pathology reports were reviewed to establish the histologic type, grade, and receptor status.
RESULTS: The study involved 98 patients with 100 lesions. ER-negative tumors and PR-negative tumors had significantly higher mean lesion-to-background ratio than did their respective receptor-positive tumors (p = 0.02). Triple-negative tumors (i.e., ER-negative, PR-negative, and HER2-negative tumors) had statistically higher mean lesion-to-background ratio than did ER-positive PR-positive HER2-negative tumors (p = 0.04). Infiltrating ductal carcinomas had significantly higher PEM FDG uptake values than did infiltrating lobular carcinomas (p = 0.02-0.04). Breast tumors with higher histologic grade also had significantly higher PEM FDG uptake values than did those with lower grade (p = 0.03 and p < 0.001). A moderately high correlation (0.76-0.79) was seen between whole-body PET/CT and PEM uptake values.
CONCLUSION: This study shows a correlation between PEM FDG uptake values and the prognostic factors that have been shown to predict breast cancer survival.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21785049     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.6478

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  21 in total

1.  Usefulness of positron emission mammography in the evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  Irma Soldevilla-Gallardo; Sevastian S Medina-Ornelas; Cynthia Villarreal-Garza; Enrique Bargalló-Rocha; Claudia Hs Caro-Sánchez; Rodrigo Hernández-Ramírez; Enrique Estrada-Lobato
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-10-20

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.  Clinical utility of positron emission mammography.

Authors:  Shannon B Glass; Zeeshan A Shah
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2013-07

Review 4.  Use of Breast-Specific PET Scanners and Comparison with MR Imaging.

Authors:  Deepa Narayanan; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.266

5.  Quantitative assessment of metabolic tumor burden in molecular subtypes of primary breast cancer with FDG PET/CT.

Authors:  Wei Chen; Lei Zhu; Xiaozhou Yu; Qiang Fu; Wengui Xu; Ping Wang
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.630

6.  Impact of Using Uniform Attenuation Coefficients for Heterogeneously Dense Breasts in a Dedicated Breast PET/X-ray Scanner.

Authors:  Lawrence R MacDonald; Joseph Y Lo; Gregory M Sturgeon; Chengeng Zeng; Robert L Harrison; Paul E Kinahan; William Paul Segars
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2020-04-29

7.  Can positron emission mammography help to identify clinically significant breast cancer in women with suspicious calcifications on mammography?

Authors:  Almir G V Bitencourt; Eduardo N P Lima; Bruna R C Macedo; Jorge L F A Conrado; Elvira F Marques; Rubens Chojniak
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Strong association of epidermal growth factor receptor status with breast cancer FDG uptake.

Authors:  Joohee Lee; Eun Jeong Lee; Seung Hwan Moon; Seokhwi Kim; Seung Hyup Hyun; Young Seok Cho; Joon Young Choi; Byung-Tae Kim; Kyung-Han Lee
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Association between ¹⁸F-FDG uptake and molecular subtype of breast cancer.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Kitajima; Kazuhito Fukushima; Yasuo Miyoshi; Arisa Nishimukai; Seiichi Hirota; Yoko Igarashi; Takayuki Katsuura; Kaoru Maruyama; Shozo Hirota
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Correlation of PUV and SUV in the extremities while using PEM as a high-resolution positron emission scanner.

Authors:  Sania Rahim; Osama Mawlawi; Patricia Fox; Shree Taylor; Richelle Millican; Nancy M Swanston; J Elliott Brown; Eric M Rohren
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.