Literature DB >> 26359256

A Phase II Study of 3'-Deoxy-3'-18F-Fluorothymidine PET in the Assessment of Early Response of Breast Cancer to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results from ACRIN 6688.

Lale Kostakoglu1, Fenghai Duan2, Michael O Idowu3, Paul R Jolles3, Harry D Bear4, Mark Muzi5, Jean Cormack2, John P Muzi5, Daniel A Pryma6, Jennifer M Specht5, Linda Hovanessian-Larsen7, John Miliziano8, Sharon Mallett9, Anthony F Shields10, David A Mankoff.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Our objective was to determine whether early change in standardized uptake values (SUVs) of 3'deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine ((18)F-FLT) using PET with CT could predict pathologic complete response (pCR) of primary breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The key secondary objective was to correlate SUV with the proliferation marker Ki-67 at baseline and after NAC.
METHODS: This prospective, multicenter phase II study did not specify the therapeutic regimen, thus, NAC varied among centers. All evaluable patients underwent (18)F-FLT PET/CT at baseline (FLT1) and after 1 cycle of NAC (FLT2); 43 patients were imaged at FLT1, FLT2, and after NAC completion (FLT3). The percentage change in maximum SUV (%ΔSUVmax) between FLT1 and FLT2 and FLT3 was calculated for the primary tumors. The predictive value of ΔSUVmax for pCR was determined using receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis. The correlation between SUVmax and Ki-67 was also assessed.
RESULTS: Fifty-one of 90 recruited patients (median age, 54 y; stage IIA-IIIC) met the eligibility criteria for the primary objective analysis, with an additional 22 patients totaling 73 patients for secondary analyses. A pCR in the primary breast cancer was achieved in 9 of 51 patients. NAC resulted in a significant reduction in %SUVmax (mean Δ, 39%; 95% confidence interval, 31-46). There was a marginal difference in %ΔSUVmax_FLT1-FLT2 between pCR and no-pCR patient groups (Wilcoxon 1-sided P = 0.050). The area under the curve for ΔSUVmax in the prediction of pCR was 0.68 (90% confidence interval, 0.50-0.83; Delong 1-sided P = 0.05), with slightly better predictive value for percentage mean SUV (P = 0.02) and similar prediction for peak SUV (P = 0.04). There was a weak correlation with pretherapy SUVmax and Ki-67 (r = 0.29, P = 0.04), but the correlation between SUVmax and Ki-67 after completion of NAC was stronger (r = 0.68, P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: (18)F-FLT PET imaging of breast cancer after 1 cycle of NAC weakly predicted pCR in the setting of variable NAC regimens. Posttherapy (18)F-FLT uptake correlated with Ki-67 on surgical specimens. These results suggest some efficacy of (18)F-FLT as an indicator of early therapeutic response of breast cancer to NAC and support future multicenter studies to test (18)F-FLT PET in a more uniformly treated patient population.
© 2015 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  18F-FLT PET; breast cancer; early treatment response; neoadjuvant therapy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26359256      PMCID: PMC4737647          DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.115.160663

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  36 in total

1.  Predictive value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy failure in breast cancer using FDG-PET after the first course.

Authors:  Hélène Kolesnikov-Gauthier; Laurence Vanlemmens; Marie-Christine Baranzelli; Philippe Vennin; Véronique Servent; Charles Fournier; Philippe Carpentier; Jacques Bonneterre
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Phase III comparison of standard doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide versus weekly doxorubicin and daily oral cyclophosphamide plus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor as neoadjuvant therapy for inflammatory and locally advanced breast cancer: SWOG 0012.

Authors:  Georgiana K Ellis; William E Barlow; Julie R Gralow; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Christy A Russell; Melanie E Royce; Edith A Perez; Danika Lew; Robert B Livingston
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-01-10       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Randomized phase II neoadjuvant comparison between letrozole, anastrozole, and exemestane for postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-rich stage 2 to 3 breast cancer: clinical and biomarker outcomes and predictive value of the baseline PAM50-based intrinsic subtype--ACOSOG Z1031.

Authors:  Matthew J Ellis; Vera J Suman; Jeremy Hoog; Li Lin; Jacqueline Snider; Aleix Prat; Joel S Parker; Jingqin Luo; Katherine DeSchryver; D Craig Allred; Laura J Esserman; Gary W Unzeitig; Julie Margenthaler; Gildy V Babiera; P Kelly Marcom; Joseph M Guenther; Mark A Watson; Marilyn Leitch; Kelly Hunt; John A Olson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-05-09       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  [18F]-3'Deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography and breast cancer response to docetaxel.

Authors:  Kaiyumars B Contractor; Laura M Kenny; Justin Stebbing; Lula Rosso; Rizvana Ahmad; Jimmy Jacob; Amarnath Challapalli; Federico Turkheimer; Adil Al-Nahhas; Rohini Sharma; R Charles Coombes; Eric O Aboagye
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-10-25       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 5.  Correlation between Ki-67 immunohistochemistry and 18F-fluorothymidine uptake in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  A Chalkidou; D B Landau; E W Odell; V R Cornelius; M J O'Doherty; P K Marsden
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 9.162

6.  [(18)F]FLT-PET imaging does not always "light up" proliferating tumor cells.

Authors:  Cathy C Zhang; Zhengming Yan; Wenlin Li; Kyle Kuszpit; Cory L Painter; Qin Zhang; Patrick B Lappin; Tim Nichols; Maruja E Lira; Timothy Affolter; Neeta R Fahey; Carleen Cullinane; Mary Spilker; Kenneth Zasadny; Peter O'Brien; Dana Buckman; Anthony Wong; James G Christensen
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Monitoring early response to taxane therapy in advanced breast cancer with circulating tumor cells and [(18)F] 3´-deoxy-3´-fluorothymidine PET: a pilot study.

Authors:  Kaiyumars Contractor; Eric O Aboagye; Jimmy Jacob; Amarnath Challapalli; R Charles Coombes; Justin Stebbing
Journal:  Biomark Med       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.851

8.  Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer working group.

Authors:  Mitch Dowsett; Torsten O Nielsen; Roger A'Hern; John Bartlett; R Charles Coombes; Jack Cuzick; Matthew Ellis; N Lynn Henry; Judith C Hugh; Tracy Lively; Lisa McShane; Soon Paik; Frederique Penault-Llorca; Ljudmila Prudkin; Meredith Regan; Janine Salter; Christos Sotiriou; Ian E Smith; Giuseppe Viale; Jo Anne Zujewski; Daniel F Hayes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-09-29       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Ki67 proliferation in core biopsies versus surgical samples - a model for neo-adjuvant breast cancer studies.

Authors:  Quinci Romero; Pär-Ola Bendahl; Marie Klintman; Niklas Loman; Christian Ingvar; Lisa Rydén; Carsten Rose; Dorthe Grabau; Signe Borgquist
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2011-08-07       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Quantification of intra-tumour cell proliferation heterogeneity using imaging descriptors of 18F fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography.

Authors:  J M Y Willaime; F E Turkheimer; L M Kenny; E O Aboagye
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 3.609

View more
  28 in total

1.  PET/CT-Based Response Evaluation in Cancer-a Systematic Review of Design Issues.

Authors:  Oke Gerke; Karen Ehlers; Edith Motschall; Poul Flemming Høilund-Carlsen; Werner Vach
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Impact of Using Uniform Attenuation Coefficients for Heterogeneously Dense Breasts in a Dedicated Breast PET/X-ray Scanner.

Authors:  Lawrence R MacDonald; Joseph Y Lo; Gregory M Sturgeon; Chengeng Zeng; Robert L Harrison; Paul E Kinahan; William Paul Segars
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2020-04-29

Review 3.  Future cancer research priorities in the USA: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

Authors:  Elizabeth M Jaffee; Chi Van Dang; David B Agus; Brian M Alexander; Kenneth C Anderson; Alan Ashworth; Anna D Barker; Roshan Bastani; Sangeeta Bhatia; Jeffrey A Bluestone; Otis Brawley; Atul J Butte; Daniel G Coit; Nancy E Davidson; Mark Davis; Ronald A DePinho; Robert B Diasio; Giulio Draetta; A Lindsay Frazier; Andrew Futreal; Sam S Gambhir; Patricia A Ganz; Levi Garraway; Stanton Gerson; Sumit Gupta; James Heath; Ruth I Hoffman; Cliff Hudis; Chanita Hughes-Halbert; Ramy Ibrahim; Hossein Jadvar; Brian Kavanagh; Rick Kittles; Quynh-Thu Le; Scott M Lippman; David Mankoff; Elaine R Mardis; Deborah K Mayer; Kelly McMasters; Neal J Meropol; Beverly Mitchell; Peter Naredi; Dean Ornish; Timothy M Pawlik; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Martin G Pomper; Derek Raghavan; Christine Ritchie; Sally W Schwarz; Richard Sullivan; Richard Wahl; Jedd D Wolchok; Sandra L Wong; Alfred Yung
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 41.316

4.  Simulation study of quantitative precision of the PET/X dedicated breast PET scanner.

Authors:  Chengeng Zeng; Paul E Kinahan; Hua Qian; Robert L Harrison; Kyle M Champley; Lawrence R MacDonald
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-10-30

5.  Universal scaling laws rule explosive growth in human cancers.

Authors:  Víctor M Pérez-García; Gabriel F Calvo; Jesús J Bosque; Odelaisy León-Triana; Juan Jiménez; Julián Perez-Beteta; Juan Belmonte-Beitia; Manuel Valiente; Lucía Zhu; Pedro García-Gómez; Pilar Sánchez-Gómez; Esther Hernández-San Miguel; Rafael Hortigüela; Youness Azimzade; David Molina-García; Álvaro Martinez; Ángel Acosta Rojas; Ana Ortiz de Mendivil; Francois Vallette; Philippe Schucht; Michael Murek; María Pérez-Cano; David Albillo; Antonio F Honguero Martínez; Germán A Jiménez Londoño; Estanislao Arana; Ana M García Vicente
Journal:  Nat Phys       Date:  2020-08-10       Impact factor: 20.034

6.  The use of 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine (FLT) PET in the assessment of long-term survival in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Benjamin E Ueberroth; Jawana M Lawhorn-Crews; Lance K Heilbrun; Daryn W Smith; Janice Akoury; Rouba Ali-Fehmi; Nicole T Eiseler; Anthony F Shields
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2019-02-27       Impact factor: 2.668

Review 7.  Development of Companion Diagnostics.

Authors:  David A Mankoff; Christine E Edmonds; Michael D Farwell; Daniel A Pryma
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.446

Review 8.  Qualification of National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers for Quantitative PET/CT Imaging in Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Joshua S Scheuermann; Janet S Reddin; Adam Opanowski; Paul E Kinahan; Barry A Siegel; Lalitha K Shankar; Joel S Karp
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2017-03-02       Impact factor: 10.057

9.  Predicting Responses to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Breast Cancer: ACRIN 6691 Trial of Diffuse Optical Spectroscopic Imaging.

Authors:  Bruce J Tromberg; Zheng Zhang; Anaïs Leproux; Thomas D O'Sullivan; Albert E Cerussi; Philip M Carpenter; Rita S Mehta; Darren Roblyer; Wei Yang; Keith D Paulsen; Brian W Pogue; Shudong Jiang; Peter A Kaufman; Arjun G Yodh; So Hyun Chung; Mitchell Schnall; Bradley S Snyder; Nola Hylton; David A Boas; Stefan A Carp; Steven J Isakoff; David Mankoff
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2016-08-15       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 10.  Molecular imaging to guide systemic cancer therapy: Illustrative examples of PET imaging cancer biomarkers.

Authors:  Austin R Pantel; David A Mankoff
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2016-05-16       Impact factor: 8.679

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.