Christopher C Riedl1, Elina Slobod1, Maxine Jochelson2, Monica Morrow3, Debra A Goldman4, Mithat Gonen4, Wolfgang A Weber2, Gary A Ulaner5. 1. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 2. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 3. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York; and. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 5. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York Department of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York ulanerg@mskcc.org.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines consider (18)F-FDG PET/CT for only clinical stage III breast cancer patients. However, there is debate whether TNM staging should be the only factor in considering if PET/CT is warranted. Patient age may be an additional consideration, because young breast cancer patients often have more aggressive tumors with potential for earlier metastases. This study assessed PET/CT for staging of asymptomatic breast cancer patients younger than 40 y. METHODS: In this Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective study, our hospital information system was screened for breast cancer patients younger than 40 y who underwent staging PET/CT before any treatment. Patients with symptoms or conventional imaging findings suggestive of distant metastases or with prior malignancy were excluded. Initial stage was based on physical examination, mammography, ultrasound, and breast MR imaging. PET/CT was then evaluated to identify unsuspected extraaxillary regional nodal and distant metastases. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-four patients with initial breast cancer stage I to IIIC met inclusion criteria. PET/CT findings led to upstaging to stage III or IV in 28 patients (21%). Unsuspected extraaxillary regional nodes were found in 15 of 134 patients (11%) and distant metastases in 20 of 134 (15%), with 7 of 134 (5%) demonstrating both. PET/CT revealed stage IV disease in 1 of 20 (5%) patients with initial clinical stage I, 2 of 44 (5%) stage IIA, 8 of 47 (17%) stage IIB, 4 of 13 (31%) stage IIIA, 4 of 8 (50%) stage IIIB, and 1 of 2 (50%) stage IIIC. All 20 patients upstaged to stage IV were histologically confirmed. Four synchronous thyroid and 1 rectal malignancies were identified. CONCLUSION: PET/CT revealed distant metastases in 17% of asymptomatic stage IIB breast cancer patients younger than 40 y. Although guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommend against systemic staging in patients with stage II disease, our data suggest that PET/CT might be valuable in younger patients with stage IIB and III disease. Use of PET/CT in younger patients has the potential to reduce the morbidity and cost of unnecessary therapies in young breast cancer patients.
UNLABELLED: National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines consider (18)F-FDG PET/CT for only clinical stage III breast cancer patients. However, there is debate whether TNM staging should be the only factor in considering if PET/CT is warranted. Patient age may be an additional consideration, because young breast cancerpatients often have more aggressive tumors with potential for earlier metastases. This study assessed PET/CT for staging of asymptomatic breast cancerpatients younger than 40 y. METHODS: In this Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective study, our hospital information system was screened for breast cancerpatients younger than 40 y who underwent staging PET/CT before any treatment. Patients with symptoms or conventional imaging findings suggestive of distant metastases or with prior malignancy were excluded. Initial stage was based on physical examination, mammography, ultrasound, and breast MR imaging. PET/CT was then evaluated to identify unsuspected extraaxillary regional nodal and distant metastases. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-four patients with initial breast cancer stage I to IIIC met inclusion criteria. PET/CT findings led to upstaging to stage III or IV in 28 patients (21%). Unsuspected extraaxillary regional nodes were found in 15 of 134 patients (11%) and distant metastases in 20 of 134 (15%), with 7 of 134 (5%) demonstrating both. PET/CT revealed stage IV disease in 1 of 20 (5%) patients with initial clinical stage I, 2 of 44 (5%) stage IIA, 8 of 47 (17%) stage IIB, 4 of 13 (31%) stage IIIA, 4 of 8 (50%) stage IIIB, and 1 of 2 (50%) stage IIIC. All 20 patients upstaged to stage IV were histologically confirmed. Four synchronous thyroid and 1 rectal malignancies were identified. CONCLUSION: PET/CT revealed distant metastases in 17% of asymptomatic stage IIB breast cancerpatients younger than 40 y. Although guidelines of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommend against systemic staging in patients with stage II disease, our data suggest that PET/CT might be valuable in younger patients with stage IIB and III disease. Use of PET/CT in younger patients has the potential to reduce the morbidity and cost of unnecessary therapies in young breast cancerpatients.
Authors: R A Brito; V Valero; A U Buzdar; D J Booser; F Ames; E Strom; M Ross; R L Theriault; D Frye; S W Kau; L Asmar; M McNeese; S E Singletary; G N Hortobagyi Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: U Veronesi; C De Cicco; V E Galimberti; J R Fernandez; N Rotmensz; G Viale; G Spano; A Luini; M Intra; P Veronesi; A Berrettini; G Paganelli Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2006-12-12 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Min Jung Seo; Jong Jin Lee; Hye Ok Kim; Sun-Young Chae; Seol Hoon Park; Jin-Sook Ryu; Sei Hyun Ahn; Jong Won Lee; Byung Ho Son; Gyung-Yub Gong; Dae Hyuk Moon Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-11-06 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Richard L Theriault; Robert W Carlson; Craig Allred; Benjamin O Anderson; Harold J Burstein; Stephen B Edge; William B Farrar; Andres Forero; Sharon Hermes Giordano; Lori J Goldstein; William J Gradishar; Daniel F Hayes; Clifford A Hudis; Steven J Isakoff; Britt-Marie E Ljung; David A Mankoff; P Kelly Marcom; Ingrid A Mayer; Beryl McCormick; Lori J Pierce; Elizabeth C Reed; Lee S Schwartzberg; Mary Lou Smith; Hatem Soliman; George Somlo; John H Ward; Antonio C Wolff; Richard Zellars; Dorothy A Shead; Rashmi Kumar Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Ana María García Vicente; Ángel Soriano Castrejón; Jesús Fernando López-Fidalgo; Mariano Amo-Salas; María Del Mar Muñoz Sanchez; Ruth Álvarez Cabellos; Ruth Espinosa Aunión Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-07-09 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Molly P Hogan; Debra A Goldman; Brittany Dashevsky; Christopher C Riedl; Mithat Gönen; Joseph R Osborne; Maxine Jochelson; Clifford Hudis; Monica Morrow; Gary A Ulaner Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Gary A Ulaner; Raychel Castillo; Debra A Goldman; Jonathan Wills; Christopher C Riedl; Katja Pinker-Domenig; Maxine S Jochelson; Mithat Gönen Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-04-30 Impact factor: 9.236