Kazuhiro Kitajima1, Toshiko Yamano2, Kazuhito Fukushima3, Yasuo Miyoshi4, Seiichi Hirota5, Yusuke Kawanaka6, Mouri Miya7, Hiroshi Doi8, Koichiro Yamakado9, Shozo Hirota10. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET center, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: zu10041976@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Department of Radiology, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: t-yama@hyo-med.ac.jp. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET center, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: fukuchan0106@gmail.com. 4. Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: ymiyoshi@hyo-med.ac.jp. 5. Department of Surgical Pathology, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: hiros@hyo-med.ac.jp. 6. Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET center, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: n_you_634@yahoo.co.jp. 7. Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET center, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: m-mou@hyo-med.ac.jp. 8. Department of Radiology, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: h-doi@hyo-med.ac.jp. 9. Department of Radiology, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: ko-yamakado@hyo-med.ac.jp. 10. Department of Radiology, Hyogo College of Medicine, 1-1 Mukogawa-cho, Nishinomiya, Hyogo 663-8501, JAPAN. Electronic address: hirota-s@hyo-med.ac.jp.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To correlate both primary lesion maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) of FDG-PET/CT, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with clinicopathologic prognostic factors in patients with breast carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 214 patients with 216 mass-type invasive breast carcinomas underwent whole-body FDG-PET/CT and 3-Tesla breast MRI including DWI before initial therapy. The primary tumor's SUVmax and ADC values were measured using FDG-PET/CT and DWI, respectively. Histologic analysis parameters included tumor size, expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67, nuclear grade, histology subtype, and axillary lymph node (LN) metastasis. The relationships among SUVmax, ADC values, and pathologic prognostic factors were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean SUVmax and ADCmean were 5.63±3.79 (range, 1.2-24.17) and 894±204×10(-6)mm(2)/s (range, 452-1550×10(-6)), respectively. There was a significant but weak inverse correlation between the SUVmax and ADCmean values (correlation coefficient r=-0.30, p<0.0001). SUVmax was associated with numerous prognostic factors such as tumor size (p<0.0001), expression levels of ER (p=0.00041), PR (p=0.00028), HER2 (p=0.00021), and Ki-67 (p<0.0001), nuclear grade (p<0.0001), histology subtype (p=0.00061), axillary LN metastasis (p<0.0001), and TNM staging (p<0.0001). Meanwhile, ADCmean value was associated with tumor size (p=0.013), expression of Ki-67 (p=0.0010), histology subtype (p=0.00013), axillary LN metastasis (p=0.00059), and TNM staging (p=0.0011). CONCLUSIONS: Primary tumor SUVmax on FDG-PET/CT has a stronger relationship with known prognostic parameters and may be a more useful for predicting the prognosis of breast carcinoma than ADC values.
PURPOSE: To correlate both primary lesion maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) of FDG-PET/CT, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) with clinicopathologic prognostic factors in patients with breast carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 214 patients with 216 mass-type invasive breast carcinomas underwent whole-body FDG-PET/CT and 3-Tesla breast MRI including DWI before initial therapy. The primary tumor's SUVmax and ADC values were measured using FDG-PET/CT and DWI, respectively. Histologic analysis parameters included tumor size, expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67, nuclear grade, histology subtype, and axillary lymph node (LN) metastasis. The relationships among SUVmax, ADC values, and pathologic prognostic factors were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean SUVmax and ADCmean were 5.63±3.79 (range, 1.2-24.17) and 894±204×10(-6)mm(2)/s (range, 452-1550×10(-6)), respectively. There was a significant but weak inverse correlation between the SUVmax and ADCmean values (correlation coefficient r=-0.30, p<0.0001). SUVmax was associated with numerous prognostic factors such as tumor size (p<0.0001), expression levels of ER (p=0.00041), PR (p=0.00028), HER2 (p=0.00021), and Ki-67 (p<0.0001), nuclear grade (p<0.0001), histology subtype (p=0.00061), axillary LN metastasis (p<0.0001), and TNM staging (p<0.0001). Meanwhile, ADCmean value was associated with tumor size (p=0.013), expression of Ki-67 (p=0.0010), histology subtype (p=0.00013), axillary LN metastasis (p=0.00059), and TNM staging (p=0.0011). CONCLUSIONS:Primary tumor SUVmax on FDG-PET/CT has a stronger relationship with known prognostic parameters and may be a more useful for predicting the prognosis of breast carcinoma than ADC values.
Authors: Nita Amornsiripanitch; Vicky T Nguyen; Habib Rahbar; Daniel S Hippe; Vijayakrishna K Gadi; Mara H Rendi; Savannah C Partridge Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Heinrich Magometschnigg; Katja Pinker; Thomas Helbich; Anita Brandstetter; Margaretha Rudas; Thomas Nakuz; Pascal Baltzer; Wolfgang Wadsak; Marcus Hacker; Michael Weber; Peter Dubsky; Martin Filipits Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Mariarosaria Incoronato; Anna Maria Grimaldi; Carlo Cavaliere; Marianna Inglese; Peppino Mirabelli; Serena Monti; Umberto Ferbo; Emanuele Nicolai; Andrea Soricelli; Onofrio Antonio Catalano; Marco Aiello; Marco Salvatore Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-04-25 Impact factor: 9.236