I Jo1, Seok Kil Zeon2, Sung Hoon Kim1, Hae Won Kim1, Sun Hee Kang3, Sun Young Kwon4, Su Jin Kim5. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Keimyung University, School of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Bundang Jesaeng General Hospital, Seohyeon-dong 255-2, Seongnam, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Surgery, Keimyung University, School of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Pathology, Keimyung University, School of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea. 5. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Dongguk University, School of Medicine, Gyeongju, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation of primary tumor FDG uptake to clinicopathological prognostic factors in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 136 of 215 female patients with pathologically proven invasive ductal breast cancer from January 2008 to December 2011 who underwent F-18 FDG PET/CT for initial staging and follow-up after curative treatment with analysis of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epithelial growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the primary breast tumor was measured and compared with hormonal receptor and HER2 overexpression status. RESULTS: The high SUVmax of primary breast tumors is significantly correlated with the clinicopathological factors: tumor size, histologic grade, TNM stage, negativity of ER, negativity of PR, HER2 overexpression and triple negativity. The recurrent group with non-triple negative cancer had a higher SUVmax compared with the non-recurrent group, though no significant difference in FDG uptake was noted between the recurrence and non-recurrent groups in subjects with triple-negative cancer. Lymph node involvement was the independent risk factor for cancer recurrence in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, high FDG uptake in primary breast tumors is significantly correlated with clinicopathological factors, such as tumor size, histologic grade, TNM stage, negativity of the hormonal receptor, HER2 overexpression and triple negativity. Therefore, FDG PET/CT is a helpful prognostic tool to direct the further management of patients with breast cancer.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation of primary tumorFDG uptake to clinicopathological prognostic factors in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 136 of 215 female patients with pathologically proven invasive ductal breast cancer from January 2008 to December 2011 who underwent F-18 FDG PET/CT for initial staging and follow-up after curative treatment with analysis of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epithelial growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the primary breast tumor was measured and compared with hormonal receptor and HER2 overexpression status. RESULTS: The high SUVmax of primary breast tumors is significantly correlated with the clinicopathological factors: tumor size, histologic grade, TNM stage, negativity of ER, negativity of PR, HER2 overexpression and triple negativity. The recurrent group with non-triple negative cancer had a higher SUVmax compared with the non-recurrent group, though no significant difference in FDG uptake was noted between the recurrence and non-recurrent groups in subjects with triple-negative cancer. Lymph node involvement was the independent risk factor for cancer recurrence in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, high FDG uptake in primary breast tumors is significantly correlated with clinicopathological factors, such as tumor size, histologic grade, TNM stage, negativity of the hormonal receptor, HER2 overexpression and triple negativity. Therefore, FDG PET/CT is a helpful prognostic tool to direct the further management of patients with breast cancer.
Authors: M Pennant; Y Takwoingi; L Pennant; C Davenport; A Fry-Smith; A Eisinga; L Andronis; T Arvanitis; J Deeks; C Hyde Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Charles Marcus; Pat W Whitworth; Devaki S Surasi; Sara I Pai; Rathan M Subramaniam Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Antonio C Wolff; M Elizabeth H Hammond; Jared N Schwartz; Karen L Hagerty; D Craig Allred; Richard J Cote; Mitchell Dowsett; Patrick L Fitzgibbons; Wedad M Hanna; Amy Langer; Lisa M McShane; Soonmyung Paik; Mark D Pegram; Edith A Perez; Michael F Press; Anthony Rhodes; Catharine Sturgeon; Sheila E Taube; Raymond Tubbs; Gail H Vance; Marc van de Vijver; Thomas M Wheeler; Daniel F Hayes Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-12-11 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bong-Il Song; Chae Moon Hong; Hong Je Lee; Sungmin Kang; Shin Young Jeong; Hae Won Kim; Yee Soo Chae; Ji Young Park; Sang-Woo Lee; Byeong-Cheol Ahn; Jaetae Lee Journal: Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-04-20
Authors: Justine Perrin; Karim Farid; Hilde Van Parijs; Olena Gorobets; Vincent Vinh-Hung; Nam P Nguyen; Navid Djassemi; Mark De Ridder; Hendrik Everaert Journal: World J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-04-24
Authors: Min Young Yoo; Yoo-Seok Yoon; Min Seok Suh; Jai Young Cho; Ho-Seong Han; Won Woo Lee Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2020-08-28 Impact factor: 1.817