Literature DB >> 24562642

Staging the axilla in breast cancer patients with ¹⁸F-FDG PET: how small are the metastases that we can detect with new generation clinical PET systems?

Dimitri Bellevre1, Cécile Blanc Fournier, Odile Switsers, Audrey Emmanuelle Dugué, Christelle Levy, Djelila Allouache, Cédric Desmonts, Hubert Crouet, Jean-Marc Guilloit, Jean-Michel Grellard, Nicolas Aide.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Point spread function (PSF) reconstruction improves spatial resolution throughout the entire field of view of a PET system and can detect smaller metastatic deposits than conventional algorithms such as OSEM. We assessed the impact of PSF reconstruction on quantitative values and diagnostic accuracy for axillary staging of breast cancer patients, compared with an OSEM reconstruction, with emphasis on the size of nodal metastases.
METHODS: This was a prospective study in a single referral centre in which 50 patients underwent an (18)F-FDG PET examination before axillary lymph node dissection. PET data were reconstructed with an OSEM algorithm and PSF reconstruction, analysed blindly and validated by a pathologist who measured the largest nodal metastasis per axilla. This size was used to evaluate PET diagnostic performance.
RESULTS: On pathology, 34 patients (68%) had nodal involvement. Overall, the median size of the largest nodal metastasis per axilla was 7 mm (range 0.5 - 40 mm). PSF reconstruction detected more involved nodes than OSEM reconstruction (p = 0.003). The mean PSF to OSEM SUVmax ratio was 1.66 (95 % CI 1.01 - 2.32). The sensitivities of PSF and OSEM reconstructions were, respectively, 96% and 92% in patients with a largest nodal metastasis of >7 mm, 60% and 40% in patients with a largest nodal metastasis of ≤7 mm, and 92% and 69% in patients with a primary tumour ≤30 mm. Biggerstaff graphical comparison showed that globally PSF reconstruction was superior to OSEM reconstruction. The median sizes of the largest nodal metastasis in patients with nodal involvement not detected by either PSF or OSEM reconstruction, detected by PSF but not by OSEM reconstruction and detected by both reconstructions were 3, 6 and 16 mm (p = 0.0064) respectively. In patients with nodal involvement detected by PSF reconstruction but not by OSEM reconstruction, the smallest detectable metastasis was 1.8 mm.
CONCLUSION: As a result of better activity recovery, PET with PSF reconstruction performed better than PET with OSEM reconstruction in detecting nodal metastases ≤7 mm. However, its sensitivity is still insufficient for it to replace surgical approaches for axillary staging. PET with PSF reconstruction could be used to perform sentinel node biopsy more safely in patients with a primary tumour ≤30 mm and with unremarkable PET results in the axilla.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24562642      PMCID: PMC4006125          DOI: 10.1007/s00259-014-2689-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN: 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


  31 in total

1.  Diagnostic and prognostic correlates of preoperative FDG PET for breast cancer.

Authors:  Vincent Vinh-Hung; Hendrik Everaert; Jan Lamote; Mia Voordeckers; Hilde van Parijs; Marian Vanhoeij; Guy Verfaillie; Christel Fontaine; Hansjoerg Vees; Osman Ratib; Georges Vlastos; Mark De Ridder
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Performance characteristics obtained for a new 3-dimensional lutetium oxyorthosilicate-based whole-body PET/CT scanner with the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2-2001 standard.

Authors:  Marco Brambilla; Chiara Secco; Marco Dominietto; Roberta Matheoud; Gianmauro Sacchetti; Eugenio Inglese
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 3.  Positron emission tomography (PET) for assessment of axillary lymph node status in early breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  K L Cooper; S Harnan; Y Meng; S E Ward; P Fitzgerald; D Papaioannou; L Wyld; C Ingram; I D Wilkinson; E Lorenz
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 4.424

4.  Communicating the significance of radiologic test results: the likelihood ratio.

Authors:  W C Black; P Armstrong
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Refining clinical diagnosis with likelihood ratios.

Authors:  David A Grimes; Kenneth F Schulz
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Apr 23-29       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Physical performance of the new hybrid PET∕CT Discovery-690.

Authors:  V Bettinardi; L Presotto; E Rapisarda; M Picchio; L Gianolli; M C Gilardi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Feasibility of FDG PET/CT to monitor the response of axillary lymph node metastases to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Marieke E Straver; Tjeerd S Aukema; Renato A Valdes Olmos; Emiel J T Rutgers; Kenneth G A Gilhuijs; Margaret E Schot; Wouter V Vogel; Marie-Jeanne T F D Vrancken Peeters
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Harmonizing SUVs in multicentre trials when using different generation PET systems: prospective validation in non-small cell lung cancer patients.

Authors:  Charline Lasnon; Cédric Desmonts; Elske Quak; Radj Gervais; Pascal Do; Catherine Dubos-Arvis; Nicolas Aide
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Prognostic significance of axillary node and infraclavicular lymph node status after mastectomy.

Authors:  B Kuru; M Camlibel; S Dinc; M A Gulcelik; H Alagol
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.424

10.  SUVref: reducing reconstruction-dependent variation in PET SUV.

Authors:  Matthew D Kelly; Jerome M Declerck
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 3.138

View more
  25 in total

1.  Effects of point spread function-based image reconstruction on neuroreceptor binding in positron emission tomography study with [(11)C]FLB 457.

Authors:  Thonnapong Thongpraparn; Yoko Ikoma; Takahiro Shiraishi; Taiga Yamaya; Hiroshi Ito
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2015-12-16

2.  Is it time to include [18F]FDG-PET/CT in the diagnostic work-up for lymph node staging in cN0 vulvar cancer patients?

Authors:  Nicolas Aide; Stephanie Markovina; Annamaria Ferrero
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  PET Probe-Guided Surgery in Patients with Breast Cancer: Proposal for a Methodological Approach.

Authors:  Paolo Orsaria; Agostino Chiaravalloti; Alessandro Fiorentini; Chiara Pistolese; Gianluca Vanni; Alessandra Vittoria Granai; Dimitrios Varvaras; Roberta Danieli; Orazio Schillaci; Giuseppe Petrella; Oreste Claudio Buonomo
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2017-01-02       Impact factor: 2.155

4.  Clinical utility of 18F-FDG-PET/MR for preoperative breast cancer staging.

Authors:  Diomidis Botsikas; Anastasia Kalovidouri; Minerva Becker; Michele Copercini; Dahila Amal Djema; Alexandre Bodmer; Sindy Monnier; Christoph D Becker; Xavier Montet; Benedicte M A Delattre; Osman Ratib; Valentina Garibotto; Claire Tabouret-Viaud
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-10-17       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  18F-FDG PET/CT heterogeneity quantification through textural features in the era of harmonisation programs: a focus on lung cancer.

Authors:  Charline Lasnon; Mohamed Majdoub; Brice Lavigne; Pascal Do; Jeannick Madelaine; Dimitris Visvikis; Mathieu Hatt; Nicolas Aide
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Why do we need irradiation of internal mammary lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer: Analysis of lymph flow and radiotherapy studies.

Authors:  Novikov Sergey Nikolaevich; Kanaev Sergey Vasilevich
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2016-10-22

7.  A nomogram for predicting three or more axillary lymph node involvement before breast cancer surgery.

Authors:  Young-Joon Kang; Jung Hyun Park; Young Wook Ju; Kyoung-Eun Kim; Yumi Kim; Eunshin Lee; Han-Byoel Lee; Dong-Young Noh; Wonshik Han
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 4.996

8.  Clinical evaluation of (18)F-fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT using point spread function reconstruction for nodal staging of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Kazuya Kawashima; Kenichi Kato; Makiko Tomabechi; Mikaru Matsuo; Koki Otsuka; Kazuyuki Ishida; Ryuji Nakamura; Shigeru Ehara
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Lymph Node Staging with a Combined Protocol of 18F-FDG PET/MRI and Sentinel Node SPECT/CT: A Prospective Study in Patients with FIGO I/II Cervical Carcinoma.

Authors:  Matthias Weissinger; Florin-Andrei Taran; Sergios Gatidis; Stefan Kommoss; Konstantin Nikolaou; Samine Sahbai; Christian la Fougère; Sara Yvonne Brucker; Helmut Dittmann
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2021-01-28       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  New PET technologies - embracing progress and pushing the limits.

Authors:  Nicolas Aide; Charline Lasnon; Adam Kesner; Craig S Levin; Irene Buvat; Andrei Iagaru; Ken Hermann; Ramsey D Badawi; Simon R Cherry; Kevin M Bradley; Daniel R McGowan
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.