PURPOSE: To determine whether the metabolic features of breast tumours differ among molecular subtypes. METHODS: This prospective study included 168 women diagnosed with locally advanced breast cancer. PET/CT was requested in the initial staging before neoadjuvant treatment (multicentre study, FISCAM grant). All patients underwent an ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT scan with a dual time-point acquisition. Both examinations (PET-1 and PET-2) were evaluated qualitatively and semiquantitatively with calculation of SUVmax (SUV-1 and SUV-2, respectively), and the percentage variation in the SUVs and retention indexes (RI) between PET-1 and PET-2 in the breast tumour were calculated. Biological prognostic parameters, including the steroid receptor status, HER-2 expression, proliferation rate (Ki-67) and grading, were determined from primary tumour tissue. Tumour subtypes were classified following the recommendations of the 12th International Breast Conference, by immunohistochemical surrogates as luminal A, luminal B-HER2(-), luminal B-HER2(+), HER2(+) or basal. Metabolic semiquantitative parameters and molecular subtypes were correlated. RESULTS: Of the 168 tumours, 151 were classified: 16 were luminal A, 53 were luminal B-HER2(-), 29 were luminal B-HER2(+), 18 were HER2(+) and 35 were basal. There were significant differences between SUV-1 and SUV-2 and the different subtypes, with higher SUVs in HER2(+) and basal tumours. No significant differences were found with respect to RI. CONCLUSION: Semiquantitative metabolic parameters showed statistically significant differences among the molecular subtypes of the tumours evaluated. Therefore, there seems to be a relationship between molecular and glycolytic phenotypes.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the metabolic features of breast tumours differ among molecular subtypes. METHODS: This prospective study included 168 women diagnosed with locally advanced breast cancer. PET/CT was requested in the initial staging before neoadjuvant treatment (multicentre study, FISCAM grant). All patients underwent an ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT scan with a dual time-point acquisition. Both examinations (PET-1 and PET-2) were evaluated qualitatively and semiquantitatively with calculation of SUVmax (SUV-1 and SUV-2, respectively), and the percentage variation in the SUVs and retention indexes (RI) between PET-1 and PET-2 in the breast tumour were calculated. Biological prognostic parameters, including the steroid receptor status, HER-2 expression, proliferation rate (Ki-67) and grading, were determined from primary tumour tissue. Tumour subtypes were classified following the recommendations of the 12th International Breast Conference, by immunohistochemical surrogates as luminal A, luminal B-HER2(-), luminal B-HER2(+), HER2(+) or basal. Metabolic semiquantitative parameters and molecular subtypes were correlated. RESULTS: Of the 168 tumours, 151 were classified: 16 were luminal A, 53 were luminal B-HER2(-), 29 were luminal B-HER2(+), 18 were HER2(+) and 35 were basal. There were significant differences between SUV-1 and SUV-2 and the different subtypes, with higher SUVs in HER2(+) and basal tumours. No significant differences were found with respect to RI. CONCLUSION: Semiquantitative metabolic parameters showed statistically significant differences among the molecular subtypes of the tumours evaluated. Therefore, there seems to be a relationship between molecular and glycolytic phenotypes.
Authors: Gong Tang; Steven Shak; Soonmyung Paik; Stewart J Anderson; Joseph P Costantino; Charles E Geyer; Eleftherios P Mamounas; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: C M Perou; T Sørlie; M B Eisen; M van de Rijn; S S Jeffrey; C A Rees; J R Pollack; D T Ross; H Johnsen; L A Akslen; O Fluge; A Pergamenschikov; C Williams; S X Zhu; P E Lønning; A L Børresen-Dale; P O Brown; D Botstein Journal: Nature Date: 2000-08-17 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Joel S Parker; Michael Mullins; Maggie C U Cheang; Samuel Leung; David Voduc; Tammi Vickery; Sherri Davies; Christiane Fauron; Xiaping He; Zhiyuan Hu; John F Quackenbush; Inge J Stijleman; Juan Palazzo; J S Marron; Andrew B Nobel; Elaine Mardis; Torsten O Nielsen; Matthew J Ellis; Charles M Perou; Philip S Bernard Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-02-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sun Seong Lee; Sang Kyun Bae; Yun Soo Park; Ji Sun Park; Tae Hyun Kim; Hye Kyoung Yoon; Hyo Jung Ahn; Seok Mo Lee Journal: Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-08-15
Authors: Mariarosaria Incoronato; Anna Maria Grimaldi; Carlo Cavaliere; Marianna Inglese; Peppino Mirabelli; Serena Monti; Umberto Ferbo; Emanuele Nicolai; Andrea Soricelli; Onofrio Antonio Catalano; Marco Aiello; Marco Salvatore Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-04-25 Impact factor: 9.236