| Literature DB >> 30456550 |
Mitsuru Koizumi1, Masamichi Koyama2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Radio-guided sentinel node (SN) biopsy is a standard method used in the treatment of early breast cancer. Single photon emission computed tomography with computed tomography (SPECT/CT) has been commonly used for SN detection. SPECT/CT adds precise anatomical information of SN sites, and it is reported that more SNs may be detectable on SPECT/CT than on planar imaging. We here investigate which breast cancer patients have benefited from SPECT/CT over planar imaging.Entities:
Keywords: Breast cancer; Contra-axilla visualization; Planar scintigraphy; Radio-guided; SPECT/CT; Sentinel node detection
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30456550 PMCID: PMC6397712 DOI: 10.1007/s12149-018-1319-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Nucl Med ISSN: 0914-7187 Impact factor: 2.668
Reasons why SPECT/CT was performed
| Number of patients | |
|---|---|
| No reason | 148 |
| Previous ipsilateral breast surgery | 99 |
| IBTR | 80 |
| Re-surgery for residual tumor | 7 |
| Benign tumor | 6 |
| Breast augmentation | 6 |
| Contamination | 6 |
| Non-visualization | 9 |
| Unexpected hot spot | 11 |
| PS | 7 |
| Contra-axilla | 1 |
| Rotter | 1 |
| intra-breast | 2 |
| Total | 273 |
IBTR ipsilateral breast tumor relapse, PS para-sternal
Previous treatments for patients with ipsilateral breast tumor relapse
| Number of patients | |
|---|---|
| Breast surgery | |
| Partial | 77 |
| Total | 3 |
| Axillary nodes | |
| No | 15 |
| Sentinel node biopsy | 52 |
| Axillary dissection | 13 |
| Adjuvant therapy | |
| No | 45 |
| Hormone only | 19 |
| Chemotherapy | 16 |
| Breast irradiation | |
| No | 49 |
| Yes | 31 |
Comparison in number of hot spots between planar images and SPECT/CT
| Detected nodes | Number of patients | Cohen’s |
|---|---|---|
| Axillary nodes | 0.967 | |
| 95% CI 0.942–0.992 | ||
| Non-visualization | 31 | |
| Planar > SPECT/CT | 1b | |
| Planar = SPECT/CT | 236 | |
| Planar < SPECT/CT | 5c | |
| Extra-axillary nodes | 1 | |
| 95% CI 1.00–1.00 | ||
| Non-visualization | 241 | |
| Planar > SPECT/CT | 0 | |
| Planar = SPECT/CT | 32 | |
| Planar < SPECT/CT | 0 |
CI confidence interval
aUsing the number of detected nodes on planar images and SPECT/CT, Cohen’ κ was calculated to evaluate the agreement between the two methods. There was an outstanding agreement between planar images and SPECT/CT
bSPECT/CT in this patient showed concordance with surgical results. In this patient, planar imaging showed 3 hot nodes and SPECT/CT showed 2 hot nodes. Two hot nodes were found during surgery
cIn two patients SPECT/CT showed concordance with surgical results, in two patients planar imaging showed concordance with surgical results, and one patient could not be judged. Each patient showed one more hot node on SPECT/CT compared with planar images.
Fig. 1A 42-year-old woman received radio-guided sentinel node (SN) detection on both planar images and SPECT/CT images the day before left breast surgery for breast cancer. She had received ipsilateral breast surgery for breast cancer 3 years before; total mastectomy, SN biopsy followed by adjuvant tamoxifen therapy. Left breast recurrent tumor was diagnosed, and left breast re-surgery was planned. Planar images (P-1: anterior view, P-2: left anterior oblique, 30°, and P-3: left anterior oblique, 60°) and SPECT/CT (A-1,2: axial fusion images, C-1,2: coronal fusion images) had been shown. Planar image (P-1) illustrated contralateral axilla and ipsilateral axilla. SPECT/CT images clearly specified level I contralateral axilla and ipsilateral level II axilla (Rotter). On surgery, both lymph nodes were harvested and revealed to have cancer metastasis. Despite adjuvant hormone therapy after re-surgery, she developed local, lymph node, and distant metastasis 2 years later
SPECT/CT added useful information over planar imaging
| Reason | Number of patients | IBTR | Non-IBTR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contamination | 8 | 2 | 6 |
| Site (anatomical information) | |||
| Level II | 11 | 6 | 5 |
| Rotter | 6 | 3 | 3 |
| Level III | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Para-sternal | 14 | 6 | 8 |
| Contra-axilla | 17 | 16 | 1 |
| Intra-breast | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Total of sites | 52 | ||
IBTR ipsilateral breast tumor relapse
Fig. 2A 57-year-old woman received radio-guided sentinel node (SN) detection on both planar images and SPECT/CT images the day before left breast surgery for breast cancer. She had a long history, with right breast surgery (lumpectomy and axillary dissection) at 38 years of age, and left breast surgery (lumpectomy and axillary dissection) at 41 years of age. She developed new left breast cancer at 57 years of age. Planar images (P-1: anterior view, P-2: left anterior oblique, 30°, and P-3: left anterior oblique, 60°) and SPECT/CT (A-1,2,3: axial fusion images, C-1,2: coronal fusion images) had been shown. Planar image (P-1) illustrated two ipsilateral axillary nodes and two para-sternal nodes. SPECT/CT images specified one level II (Rotter) axillary node (A-1, C-1) and two para-sternal nodes (A-2,3, C-2). Left total mastectomy was performed and two Rotter nodes were harvested at surgery without cancer metastasis. Para-sternal nodes were not manipulated. She received adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery, and has remained without recurrence for 1 year
Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) failure
| Imaged nodes | Number of patients | Hot node undetectable on surgery | SNB failure %a |
|---|---|---|---|
| Non-IBTR | |||
| No image | 9 | 1 | 0.5% (1/193)b |
| IBTR | |||
| No image | 9 | 8 | |
| Only para-sternal node | 3 | 2 | 13.8% (11/80) |
| Only contra-axillary node | 9 | 1 |
IBTR ipsilateral breast tumor relapse
aThe percentage of SNB failures between non-IBTR and IBTR showed p < 0.001 by Fisher’s exact test
bThe percentage of true failures should be low because SPECT/CT was performed in only a very small portion of all non-IBTR patients during the period
Results of the logistic regression analysis for SNB failure
| Previous | Number of patients | Univariate | Multivariate (forward stepwise)a | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Odds | Odds (95% CI) | Odds | Odds (95% CI) | ||||
| Breast surgery | |||||||
| No (base) | 174 | ||||||
| Yes | 99 | 0.002 | 23.862 | 3.053–186.510 | 0.074 | 7.985 | 0.816–78.146 |
| Axillary node procedure | |||||||
| No (base) | 208 | ||||||
| Sentinel node | 52 | 0.003 | 8.913 | 1.438–6.827 | NS | ||
| Axillary dissection | 13 | < 0.001 | 30.37 | 5.897–156.413 | |||
| Adjuvant therapy | |||||||
| No (base) | 234 | NS | |||||
| Hormone therapy | 20 | 0.167 | 3.139 | 0.620–15.895 | |||
| Chemotherapy | 19 | 0.021 | 5.297 | 1.280–21.924 | |||
| Breast radiation | |||||||
| No (base) | 242 | NS | |||||
| Yes | 31 | < 0.001 | 24.341 | 6.931–85.483 | 0.002 | 8.864 | 2.201–35.700 |
Logistic regression analysis was performed with SNB failure as a dependent variable
CI confidence interval, NS not significant
aMultivariate analysis was performed with a forward stepwise method with a likelihood ratio
Results of the logistic regression analysis for para-sternal and ipsilateral level II and III axillary node visualization
| Previous | Number of patients | Univariate | Multivariate (forward stepwise)a | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Odds | Odds (95% CI) | Odds | Odds (95% CI) | ||||
| Breast surgery | |||||||
| No (base) | 174 | NS | |||||
| Yes | 99 | 0.004 | 2.821 | 1.402–5.677 | |||
| Axillary node procedure | |||||||
| No (base) | 208 | ||||||
| Sentinel node | 52 | 0.004 | 3.133 | 1.438–6.827 | < 0.001 | 4.366 | 1.932–9866 |
| Axillary dissection | 13 | 0.004 | 5.875 | 1.754–19.676 | 0.001 | 23.154 | 3.844–139.466 |
| Adjuvant therapy | |||||||
| No (base) | 234 | NS | |||||
| Hormone therapy | 20 | 0.035 | 3.03 | 1.079–8.506 | |||
| Chemotherapy | 19 | 0.669 | 1.325 | 0.364–4.829 | |||
| Breast radiation | |||||||
| No (base) | 242 | NS | |||||
| Yes | 31 | 0.862 | 0.906 | 0.298–2.753 | 0.027 | 0.158 | 0.031–0.807 |
Logistic regression analysis was performed with para-sternal and ipsilateral level II and III axillary node visualization as a dependent variable
CI confidence interval, NS not significant
aMultivariate analysis was performed with a forward stepwise method with a likelihood ratio
Results of the logistic regression analysis for contra-axillary visualization
| Previous | Number of patients | Univariate | Multivariate (forward stepwise)a | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Odds | Odds (95% CI) | Odds | Odds (95% CI) | ||||
| Breast surgery | |||||||
| No (base) | 174 | NS | |||||
| Yes | 99 | 0.001 | 33.349 | 4.349–255.751 | |||
| Axillary node procedure | |||||||
| No (base) | 208 | ||||||
| Sentinel node | 52 | 0.001 | 10.63 | 2.646–42.696 | NS | ||
| Axillary dissection | 13 | < 0.001 | 79.755 | 16.463–386.05 | |||
| Adjuvant therapy | |||||||
| No (base) | 234 | NS | |||||
| Hormone therapy | 20 | < 0.001 | 13.898 | 4.117–46.919 | |||
| Chemotherapy | 19 | 0.002 | 8.648 | 2.276–32.86 | |||
| Breast radiation | |||||||
| No (base) | 242 | ||||||
| Yes | 31 | < 0.001 | 65.608 | 17.171–250.682 | < 0.001 | 65.608 | 17.171–250.682 |
Logistic regression analysis was performed with contra-axillary node visualization as a dependent variable
CI confidence interval, NS not significant
aMultivariate analysis was performed with a forward stepwise methods with a likelihood ratio