PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine the ability of breast imaging with 99mTc-sestamibi and a direct conversion-molecular breast imaging (MBI) system to predict early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). METHODS: Patients undergoing NAC for breast cancer were imaged with a direct conversion-MBI system before (baseline), at 3 to 5 weeks after onset, and after completion of NAC. Tumor size and tumor-to-background (T/B) uptake ratio measured from MBI images were compared with extent of residual disease at surgery using the residual cancer burden. RESULTS: Nineteen patients completed imaging and proceeded to surgical resection after NAC. Mean reduction in T/B ratio from baseline to 3 to 5 weeks for patients classified as RCB-0 (no residual disease), RCB-1 and RCB-2 combined, and RCB-3 (extensive residual disease) was 56% (SD, 0.20), 28% (SD, 0.20), and 4% (SD, 0.15), respectively. The reduction in the RCB-0 group was significantly greater than in RCB-1/2 (P = 0.036) and RCB-3 (P = 0.001) groups. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for determining the presence or absence of residual disease was 0.88. Using a threshold of 50% reduction in T/B ratio at 3 to 5 weeks, MBI predicted presence of residual disease at surgery with a diagnostic accuracy of 89.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64%-0.99%), sensitivity of 92.3% (95% CI, 0.74%-0.99%), and specificity of 83.3% (95% CI, 0.44%-0.99%). The reduction in tumor size at 3 to 5 weeks was not statistically different between RCB groups. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in T/B ratio on MBI images performed at 3 to 5 weeks following initiation of NAC were accurate at predicting the presence or absence of residual disease at NAC completion.
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to determine the ability of breast imaging with 99mTc-sestamibi and a direct conversion-molecular breast imaging (MBI) system to predict early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). METHODS:Patients undergoing NAC for breast cancer were imaged with a direct conversion-MBI system before (baseline), at 3 to 5 weeks after onset, and after completion of NAC. Tumor size and tumor-to-background (T/B) uptake ratio measured from MBI images were compared with extent of residual disease at surgery using the residual cancer burden. RESULTS: Nineteen patients completed imaging and proceeded to surgical resection after NAC. Mean reduction in T/B ratio from baseline to 3 to 5 weeks for patients classified as RCB-0 (no residual disease), RCB-1 and RCB-2 combined, and RCB-3 (extensive residual disease) was 56% (SD, 0.20), 28% (SD, 0.20), and 4% (SD, 0.15), respectively. The reduction in the RCB-0 group was significantly greater than in RCB-1/2 (P = 0.036) and RCB-3 (P = 0.001) groups. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for determining the presence or absence of residual disease was 0.88. Using a threshold of 50% reduction in T/B ratio at 3 to 5 weeks, MBI predicted presence of residual disease at surgery with a diagnostic accuracy of 89.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64%-0.99%), sensitivity of 92.3% (95% CI, 0.74%-0.99%), and specificity of 83.3% (95% CI, 0.44%-0.99%). The reduction in tumor size at 3 to 5 weeks was not statistically different between RCB groups. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in T/B ratio on MBI images performed at 3 to 5 weeks following initiation of NAC were accurate at predicting the presence or absence of residual disease at NAC completion.
Authors: Eleftherios P Mamounas; Ann Brown; Stewart Anderson; Roy Smith; Thomas Julian; Barbara Miller; Harry D Bear; Christopher B Caldwell; Alonzo P Walker; Wendy M Mikkelson; Jay S Stauffer; Andre Robidoux; Heather Theoret; Atilla Soran; Atilla Sovan; Bernard Fisher; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B Fisher; A Brown; E Mamounas; S Wieand; A Robidoux; R G Margolese; A B Cruz; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; N Wolmark; A DeCillis; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; N V Dimitrov Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B B Koolen; M J T F D Vrancken Peeters; J Wesseling; E H Lips; W V Vogel; T S Aukema; E van Werkhoven; K G A Gilhuijs; S Rodenhuis; E J Th Rutgers; R A Valdés Olmos Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-08-16 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Rachel F Brem; Jocelyn A Rapelyea; Gilat Zisman; Kevin Mohtashemi; Joyce Raub; Christine B Teal; Stan Majewski; Benjamin L Welch Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-08-26 Impact factor: 11.105
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: Harry D Bear; Stewart Anderson; Ann Brown; Roy Smith; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Bernard Fisher; Richard Margolese; Heather Theoret; Atilla Soran; D Lawrence Wickerham; Norman Wolmark Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-10-14 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: B Fisher; J Bryant; N Wolmark; E Mamounas; A Brown; E R Fisher; D L Wickerham; M Begovic; A DeCillis; A Robidoux; R G Margolese; A B Cruz; J L Hoehn; A W Lees; N V Dimitrov; H D Bear Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1998-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Qingjie Ma; Bin Chen; Shi Gao; Tiefeng Ji; Qiang Wen; Yan Song; Lei Zhu; Zheli Xu; Lin Liu Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michael K O'Connor; Melissa M B Morrow; Katie N Hunt; Judy C Boughey; Dietlind L Wahner-Roedler; Amy Lynn Conners; Deborah J Rhodes; Carrie B Hruska Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2017-01-14 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Amy Lynn Conners; Katie N Jones; Carrie B Hruska; Jennifer R Geske; Judy C Boughey; Deborah J Rhodes Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 3.959