OBJECTIVE: The biological significance of [¹¹C]choline (CHO) uptake in human tumours is unclear and probably linked to choline kinase-α (CHKα) expression and cell proliferation. We directly compared CHO with [¹⁸F]fluorothymidine (FLT), an imaging biomarker of proliferation, by positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with breast cancer to investigate whether cell proliferation is an important determinant of CHO uptake. Furthermore, we evaluated CHKα and the Ki67-labelling index (LIKi67) in tumour biopsies. METHODS: Sequential CHO-PET and FLT-PET within the same imaging session were performed in 21 patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (28 lesions). Average and maximum CHO standardized uptake values (SUV) at 60 min: SUV60,av, and SUV60,max, and the rate constant of net irreversible uptake, Ki, were compared with FLT uptake at 60 min: SUV60,av and SUV60,max. Biopsies were stained for CHKα and LIKi67 in eight cases. RESULTS: Tumours were equally visible on CHO-PET and FLT-PET imaging. Tumour CHO-PET strongly correlated with FLT imaging variables (Pearson's r=0.83; P<0.0001 for CHO-SUV60,max vs. FLT-SUV60,max). A statistically significant association was found between CHO-PET variables and categorical scores of cytoplasmic CHKα intensity and between FLT-PET and LIKi67 (P<0.05, one-way analysis of variance). CONCLUSION: Choline metabolism and proliferation as assessed by PET were correlated in ER-positive breast cancer, indicating that high CHO uptake is a measure of cellular proliferation in this setting. CHO uptake was also found to be related to cytoplasmic CHKα expression.
OBJECTIVE: The biological significance of [¹¹C]choline (CHO) uptake in humantumours is unclear and probably linked to choline kinase-α (CHKα) expression and cell proliferation. We directly compared CHO with [¹⁸F]fluorothymidine (FLT), an imaging biomarker of proliferation, by positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with breast cancer to investigate whether cell proliferation is an important determinant of CHO uptake. Furthermore, we evaluated CHKα and the Ki67-labelling index (LIKi67) in tumour biopsies. METHODS: Sequential CHO-PET and FLT-PET within the same imaging session were performed in 21 patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (28 lesions). Average and maximum CHO standardized uptake values (SUV) at 60 min: SUV60,av, and SUV60,max, and the rate constant of net irreversible uptake, Ki, were compared with FLT uptake at 60 min: SUV60,av and SUV60,max. Biopsies were stained for CHKα and LIKi67 in eight cases. RESULTS:Tumours were equally visible on CHO-PET and FLT-PET imaging. TumourCHO-PET strongly correlated with FLT imaging variables (Pearson's r=0.83; P<0.0001 for CHO-SUV60,max vs. FLT-SUV60,max). A statistically significant association was found between CHO-PET variables and categorical scores of cytoplasmic CHKα intensity and between FLT-PET and LIKi67 (P<0.05, one-way analysis of variance). CONCLUSION:Choline metabolism and proliferation as assessed by PET were correlated in ER-positive breast cancer, indicating that high CHO uptake is a measure of cellular proliferation in this setting. CHO uptake was also found to be related to cytoplasmic CHKα expression.
Authors: Arman Rahmim; Martin A Lodge; Nicolas A Karakatsanis; Vladimir Y Panin; Yun Zhou; Alan McMillan; Steve Cho; Habib Zaidi; Michael E Casey; Richard L Wahl Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-09-29 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Amarnath Challapalli; Tara Barwick; Rachel A Pearson; Shairoz Merchant; Francesco Mauri; Elizabeth C Howell; Katherine Sumpter; Ross J Maxwell; Eric O Aboagye; Rohini Sharma Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Iván Peñuelas; Inés Domínguez-Prado; María J García-Velloso; Josep M Martí-Climent; Macarena Rodríguez-Fraile; Carlos Caicedo; María Sánchez-Martínez; José A Richter Journal: J Oncol Date: 2012-08-29 Impact factor: 4.375
Authors: Maria T Grinde; Nirma Skrbo; Siver A Moestue; Einar A Rødland; Eldrid Borgan; Alexandr Kristian; Beathe Sitter; Tone F Bathen; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale; Gunhild M Mælandsmo; Olav Engebraaten; Therese Sørlie; Elisabetta Marangoni; Ingrid S Gribbestad Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2014-01-21 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: D K Woolf; M Beresford; S P Li; M Dowsett; B Sanghera; W L Wong; L Sonoda; S Detre; V Amin; M-L Ah-See; D Miles; A Makris Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Ella F Jones; Deep K Hathi; Rita Freimanis; Rita A Mukhtar; A Jo Chien; Laura J Esserman; Laura J Van't Veer; Bonnie N Joe; Nola M Hylton Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-06-09 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Jennifer Griessinger; Julian Schwab; Qian Chen; Anna Kühn; Jonathan Cotton; Gregory Bowden; Heike Preibsch; Gerald Reischl; Leticia Quintanilla-Martinez; Hidetoshi Mori; An Nguyen Dang; Ursula Kohlhofer; Olulanu H Aina; Alexander D Borowsky; Bernd J Pichler; Robert D Cardiff; Andreas M Schmid Journal: NPJ Breast Cancer Date: 2022-03-24