Literature DB >> 26050658

PET/MR in Breast Cancer.

Claire Tabouret-Viaud1, Diomidis Botsikas2, Bénédicte M A Delattre2, Ismini Mainta1, Gaël Amzalag1, Olivier Rager1, Vincent Vinh-Hung3, Raymond Miralbell4, Osman Ratib5.   

Abstract

Breast cancer is an international public health concern in which an optimal treatment plan requires a precise staging. Both MRI and PET imaging techniques have made significant progress in the last decades with constant improvements that made both modalities clinically relevant in several stages of breast cancer management and follow-up. On one hand, specific breast MRI permits high diagnostic accuracy for local tumor staging, and whole-body MRI can also be of great use in distant staging, eventually accompanied by organ-specific MRI sequences. Moreover, many different MRI sequences can be performed, including functional MRI, letting us foresee important improvements in breast cancer characterization in the future. On the contrary, (18)F-FDG-PET has a high diagnostic performance for the detection of distant metastases, and several other tracers currently under development may profoundly affect breast cancer management in the future with better determination of different types of breast cancers allowing personalized treatments. As a consequence PET/MR is a promising emerging technology, and it is foreseeable that in cases where both PET and MRI data are needed, a hybrid acquisition is justified when available. However, at this stage of deployment of such hybrid scanners in a clinical setting, more data are needed to demonstrate their added value beyond just patient comfort of having to undergo a single examination instead of two, and the higher confidence of diagnostic interpretation of these co-registered images. Optimized imaging protocols are still being developed and are prone to provide more efficient hybrid protocols with a potential improvement in diagnostic accuracy. More convincing studies with larger number of patients as well as cost-effectiveness studies are needed. This article provides insights into the current state-of-the-art of PET/MR in patients with breast cancer and gives an outlook on future developments of both imaging techniques and potential applications in the future.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26050658     DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2015.03.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Semin Nucl Med        ISSN: 0001-2998            Impact factor:   4.446


  20 in total

1.  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

2.  What is the diagnostic performance of 18-FDG-PET/MR compared to PET/CT for the N- and M- staging of breast cancer?

Authors:  Diomidis Botsikas; Ilias Bagetakos; Marlise Picarra; Ana Carolina Da Cunha Afonso Barisits; Sana Boudabbous; Xavier Montet; Giang Thanh Lam; Ismini Mainta; Anastasia Kalovidouri; Minerva Becker
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Deep learning beyond cats and dogs: recent advances in diagnosing breast cancer with deep neural networks.

Authors:  Jeremy R Burt; Neslisah Torosdagli; Naji Khosravan; Harish RaviPrakash; Aliasghar Mortazi; Fiona Tissavirasingham; Sarfaraz Hussein; Ulas Bagci
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Local and whole-body staging in patients with primary breast cancer: a comparison of one-step to two-step staging utilizing 18F-FDG-PET/MRI.

Authors:  Julian Kirchner; Johannes Grueneisen; Ole Martin; Mark Oehmigen; Harald H Quick; Ann-Kathrin Bittner; Oliver Hoffmann; Marc Ingenwerth; Onofrio Antonio Catalano; Philipp Heusch; Christian Buchbender; Michael Forsting; Gerald Antoch; Ken Herrmann; Lale Umutlu
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-07-28       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Simultaneous PET/MRI assessment of response to cytotoxic and hormone neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: a preliminary report.

Authors:  Valeria Romeo; Massimiliano D'Aiuto; Giuseppe Frasci; Massimo Imbriaco; Emanuele Nicolai
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2016-12-30       Impact factor: 3.064

6.  A Functional Iron Oxide Nanoparticles Modified with PLA-PEG-DG as Tumor-Targeted MRI Contrast Agent.

Authors:  Fei Xiong; Ke Hu; Haoli Yu; Lijun Zhou; Lina Song; Yu Zhang; Xiuhong Shan; Jianping Liu; Ning Gu
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 7.  Breast PET/MR Imaging.

Authors:  Amy Melsaether; Linda Moy
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 8.  Circulating tumor cells as Trojan Horse for understanding, preventing, and treating cancer: a critical appraisal.

Authors:  Alexios-Fotios A Mentis; Petros D Grivas; Efthimios Dardiotis; Nicholas A Romas; Athanasios G Papavassiliou
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 9.261

9.  What is the Diagnostic Performance of 18F-FDG-PET/MRI in the Detection of Bone Metastasis in Patients with Breast Cancer?

Authors:  Filiz Çelebi
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2019-10-01

10.  CD55 is a HIF-2α marker with anti-adhesive and pro-invading properties in neuroblastoma.

Authors:  F Cimmino; M Avitabile; L Pezone; G Scalia; D Montanaro; M Andreozzi; L Terracciano; A Iolascon; M Capasso
Journal:  Oncogenesis       Date:  2016-04-04       Impact factor: 7.485

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.