| Literature DB >> 28884133 |
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detection of bone marrow (BM) metastasis in breast cancer which is considered an early stage of bone metastasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospectively, breast cancer patients with bone metastasis were included. BM metastasis was considered if the lesion was PET positive/CT occult while bone metastasis was considered if the lesion was PET positive/ CT positive. BM metastases were observed sequentially on F18-FDG PET/CT.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28884133 PMCID: PMC5572575 DOI: 10.1155/2017/9852632
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Structural and functional features of metastatic bone disease in 35 breast cancer patients as noted on F18-FDG-PET/CT scans both at baseline (pretreatment) for all patients and at follow-up (posttreatment) for 26 patients.
| No | Age (y) | Interval (y) | Baseline F18-FDG PET/CT scan | Interval (mo) | Follow-up F18-FDG PET/CT scan | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BM lesions (PET) | Bone lesions (PET/CT) | BM lesions (PET) | Bone lesions (PET/CT) | Posttreatment response | ||||
| 1 | 80 | 0 | 14 | 44/44 | — | — | — | — |
| 2 | 38 | 0 | 6 | 16/16 | 3 | 0 | 0/19 | Responsive |
| 3 | 42 | 0 | 16 | 90/90 | — | — | — | — |
| 4 | 54 | 0 | 8 | 28/28 | 6 | 0 | 0/34 | Responsive |
| 5 | 42 | 0 | 24 | 110/110 | 4 | 0 | 0/130 | Responsive |
| 6 | 61 | 0 | 0 | 40/48 | 7 | 0 | 0/48 | Responsive |
| 7 | 42 | 0 | 0 | 35/43 | 6 | 0 | 0/43 | Responsive |
| 8 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 15/15 | 6 | 0 | 0/15 | Responsive |
| 9 | 54 | 0 | 0 | 40/40 | 4 | 0 | 40/40 | Stable |
| 10 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 9/9 | 7 | 0 | 0/9 | Responsive |
| 11 | 38 | 0 | 0 | 23/27 | 4 | 9 | 40/45 |
|
| 12 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 12/12 | 10 | 0 | 0/12 | Responsive |
| 13 | 50 | 0 | 15 | 40/40 | 5 | 0 | 0/50 | Responsive |
| 14 | 55 | 0 | 0 | 88/88 | 5 | 0 | 0/88 | Responsive |
| 15 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 101/101 | 3 | 0 | 0/101 | Responsive |
| 16 | 60 | 0 | 0 | 79/79 | 6 | 0 | 79/79 | Stable |
| 17 | 45 | 0 | 0 | 65/65 | 6 | 0 | 0/65 | Responsive |
| 18 | 42 | 0 | 8 | 40/40 | 3 | 5 | 45/45 | Stable |
| 19 | 56 | 0 | 0 | 0/17 | 10 | 0 | 10/63 |
|
| 20 | 32 | 0 | 0 | 3/3 | 6 | 0 | 0/3 | Responsive |
| 21 | 60 | 5 | 22 | 76/76 | — | — | — | — |
| 22 | 61 | 2 | 70 | 0/0 | — | — | — | — |
| 23 | 56 | 6 | 65 | 67/67 | — | — | — | — |
| 24 | 55 | 4 | 28 | 35/35 | — | — | — | — |
| 25 | 27 | 3 | 45 | 26/26 | — | — | — | — |
| 26 | 43 | 2 | 68 | 45/52 | — | — | — | — |
| 27 | 47 | 1 | 17 | 10/12 | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 45 | 2 | 3 | 6/6 | 6 | 0 | 0/7 | Responsive |
| 29 | 40 | 3 | 0 | 0/1 | 6 | 0 | 0/1 | Responsive |
| 30 | 39 | 0.5 | 2 | 25/25 | 6 | 19 | 47/47 |
|
| 31 | 45 | 7 | 3 | 4/6 | 7 | 0 | 0/8 | Responsive |
| 32 | 55 | 6 | 6 | 23/23 | 6 | 2 | 56/56 |
|
| 33 | 54 | 0.5 | 0 | 0/13 | 9 | 14 | 60/81 |
|
| 34 | 48 | 2 | 0 | 8/8 | 3 | 0 | 0/8 | Responsive |
| 35 | 48 | 3 | 0 | 88/88 | 3 | 0 | 0/88 | Responsive |
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
BM = bone marrow metastatic lesions, ∗ = interval between tissue diagnosis of breast cancer and diagnosis of bone/bone marrow metastasis by F18-FDG-PET/CT scan, ∗∗ = interval between baseline and follow-up F18-FDG-PET/CT scans, ǂ = PET positive/CT occult lesions (BM lesions), and ¥ = PET positive/CT positive lesions (i.e., number of bone lesions seen on CT that are hypermetabolic on PET). Example: patient # 2 had 6 BM lesions (PET +ve/CT −ve) and 16 active bone lesions (PET +ve/CT +ve) on baseline. On follow-up, she had 19 inactive bone lesions (PET −ve/CT +ve) and all BM lesions had disappeared (3 lesions had become bone metastasis and 3 had resolved without causing bone destruction). F18-FDG PET/CT = fluorine-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography.
Figure 1Breast cancer patient (40 years old) evaluated by F18-FDG-PET/CT showing bone marrow metastases on baseline scan (a) which was eradicated by chemotherapy before causing bone destruction as shown on 3 mo posttreatment scan (b).
Number and percentage of BM metastatic lesions and bone metastases (osteolytic/mixed/osteoblastic) in 35 patients noted on pretreatment F18-FDG-PET/CT scans and in 26 patients noted on posttreatment F18-FDG-PET/CT.
| BM | Bone metastases | Total | Patients (number) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PET/CT1 | 420 | 1353 | 1773 | 35 |
| PET/CT1 | 24 | 76 | 100 | 35 |
| PET/CT2 | 49 | 1185 | 1234 | 26 |
| PET/CT2 | 4 | 96 | 100 | 26 |
BM = bone marrow, PET/CT1 = pretreatment F18-FDG-PET/CT, PET/CT2 = posttreatment F18-FDG-PET/CT, and F18-FDG PET/CT = fluorine-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography.
Figure 2Breast cancer patient (51 years old) evaluated by F18-FDG-PET/CT showing two bone marrow metastatic lesions on baseline scan (a) which progressed to FDG-positive osteolytic metastatic bone lesions on 3 mo follow-up scan (b).
Figure 3Breast cancer patient (35 years old) evaluated by pretreatment F18-FDG-PET/CT showing multiple bone marrow metastatic lesions in pelvic bones with concomitant early development of osteoblastic metastatic bone lesion in S1 vertebral body.