Positron emission mammography in breast cancer presurgical planning: comparisons with magnetic resonance imaging
The objective of this study was to compare the performance characteristics of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission mammography (PEM) with breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a presurgical imaging and planning option for index and ipsilateral lesions in patients with newly diagnosed, biopsy-proven breast cancer.
Two hundred and eight women >25 years of age (median age = 59.7 ± 14.1 years) with biopsy-proven primary breast cancer enrolled in this prospective, single-site study. MRI, PEM, and whole-body positron emission tomography (WBPET) were conducted on each patient within 7 business days. PEM and WBPET images were acquired on the same day after intravenous administration of 370 MBq of FDG (median = 432.9 MBq). PEM and MRI images were blindly evaluated, compared with final surgical histopathology, and the sensitivity determined. Substudy analysis compared the sensitivity of PEM versus MRI in patients with different menopausal status, breast density, and use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) as well as determination of performance characteristics for additional ipsilateral lesion detection.
Two hundred and eight patients enrolled in the study of which 87% (182/208) were analyzable. Of these analyzable patients, 26.4% (48/182), 7.1% (13/182), and 64.2% (120/182) were pre-, peri-, and postmenopausal, respectively, and 48.4% (88/182) had extremely or heterogeneously dense breast tissue, while 33.5% (61/182) had a history of HRT use. Ninety-two percent (167/182) underwent core biopsy for index lesion diagnosis. Invasive cancer was found in 77.5% (141/182), while ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and/or Paget’s disease were found in 22.5% (41/182) of patients. Both PEM and MRI had index lesion depiction sensitivity of 92.8% and both were significantly better than WBPET (67.9%, p < 0.001, McNemar’s test). For index lesions, PEM and MRI had equivalent sensitivity of various tumors, categorized by tumor stage as well as similar invasive tumor size predictions with Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.61 for both PEM and MRI compared to surgical pathology. Menopausal status, breast density, and HRT did not influence the sensitivity of PEM or MRI. For 67 additional unsuspected ipsilateral lesions or multifocal lesions, PEM had sensitivity of 85% (34/40) and specificity of 74%, (20/27) compared to MRI's sensitivity of 98% (39/40) and specificity of 48% (13/27) [p = 0.074, for sensitivity; p = 0.096 for specificity]
PEM is a good alternative to MRI as a presurgical breast imaging option and its performance characteristics are not affected by patient menopausal/hormonal status or breast density.
- Elmore, JG, Armstrong, K, Lehman, CD, Fletcher, SW (2005) Screening for breast cancer. JAMA 293: pp. 1245-1256 CrossRef
- Kalager, M, Haldorsen, T, Bretthauer, M, Hoff, G, Thoresen, SO, Adami, HO (2009) Improved breast cancer survival following introduction of an organized mammography screening program among both screened and unscreened women: a population-based cohort study. Breast Cancer Res 11: pp. R44 CrossRef
- Tafra, L (2008) Positron emission mammography: a new breast imaging device. J Surg Oncol 97: pp. 372-373 CrossRef
- Mushlin Al, Kouides RW, Shapiro DE. Estimating the accuracy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. Am J. Pre Med 1998;14(2):143–53.
- Tafra, L, Fine, R, Whitworth, P, Berry, M, Woods, J, Ekbom, G (2006) Prospective randomized study comparing cryo-assisted and needle-wire localization of ultrasound-visible breast tumors. Am J Surg 192: pp. 462-470 CrossRef
- Enriquez, L, Listinsky, J (2009) Role of MRI in breast cancer management. Cleve Clin J Med 76: pp. 525-532 CrossRef
- Biglia, N, Mariani, L, Sgro, L, Mininanni, P, Moggio, G, Sismondi, P (2007) Increased incidence of lobular breast cancer in women treated with hormone replacement therapy: implications for diagnosis, surgical and medical treatment. Endocr Relat Cancer 14: pp. 549-567 CrossRef
- Degani, H, Chetrit-Dadiani, M, Bogin, L, Furman-Haran, E (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging of tumor vasculature. Thromb Haemost 89: pp. 25-33
- Furman-Haran, E, Kelcz, F, Degani, H (2002) Magnetic resonance imaging of breast cancer angiogenesis: a review. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 21: pp. 47-54
- Kriege, M, Brekelmans, CT, Boetes, C, Besnard, PE, Zonderland, HM, Obdeijn, IM (2004) Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 351: pp. 427-437 CrossRef
- Bassett LW, Dhaliwal SG, Eradat J, et al. National trends and practices in breast MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191(2):332–339.
- Kuhl, C (2007) The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 244: pp. 356-378 CrossRef
- Heywang-Köbrunner, SH, Viehweg, P, Heinig, A, Küchler, C (1997) Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur J Radiol 24: pp. 94-108 CrossRef
- Liberman, L, Morris, EA, Dershaw, DD, Abramson, AF, Tan, LK (2003) MR imaging of the ipsilateral breast in women with percutaneously proven breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180: pp. 901-910
- Grobner, T (2006) Gadolinium—a specific trigger for the development of nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis?. Nephrol Dial Transplant 21: pp. 1104-1108 CrossRef
- Kribben, A, Witzke, O, Hillen, U, Barkhausen, J, Daul, AE, Erbel, R (2009) Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis: pathogenesis, diagnosis, and therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 53: pp. 1621-1628 CrossRef
- Weinberg, I, Beylin, D, Zavarzin, V, Yarnall, S, Stepanov, PY, Anashkin, E (2005) Positron emission mammography: high-resolution biochemical breast imaging. Technol Cancer Res Treat 4: pp. 55-60
- Weinberg, IN (2006) Applications for positron emission mammography. Phys Med 21: pp. 132-137 CrossRef
- Weinberg I, Beylin D, Yarnall S, Anashkin E, Stepanov P, Dolinsky S, et al. Applications of a PET device with 1.5 mm FWHM intrinsic spatial resolution to breast cancer imaging. Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro, Arlington, VA, 2004, New York: IEEE, 2004; 1396–99.
- Avril, N, Adler, LP (2007) F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging for primary breast cancer and loco-regional staging. Radiol Clin North Am 45: pp. 645-657 CrossRef
- Berg, WA, Weinberg, IN, Narayanan, D, Lobrano, ME, Ross, E, Amodei, L (2006) High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression (“positron emission mammography”) is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer. Breast J 12: pp. 309-323 CrossRef
- Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Hovanessian Larsen L, et al. Comparative Effectiveness of Positron Emission Mammography and MRI for Presurgical Planning of the Ipsilateral Breast in Women with Breast Cancer. Radiology 2010; in press.
- Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kuhl CK, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS: Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2003.
- Narayanan D, Kalinyak JE, Berg WA. Interpretation of Positron Emission Mammography (PEM) by Experienced Breast Imaging Radiologists: Comparison to MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; in press.
- Narayanan D, Madsen KS, Kalinyak JE, Berg WA. Interpretation of Positron Emission Mammography: Feature Analysis and Rates of Malignancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; in press.
- Santra, A, Kumar, R, Reddy, R, Halanaik, D, Kumar, R, Bal, CS (2009) FDG PET-CT in the management of primary breast lymphoma. Clin Nucl Med 34: pp. 848-853 CrossRef
- Ueda, S, Tsuda, H, Asakawa, H, Shigekawa, T, Fukatsu, K, Kondo, N (2008) Clinicopathological and prognostic relevance of uptake level using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography fusion imaging (18F-FDG PET/CT) in primary breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 38: pp. 250-258 CrossRef
- Jemal, A, Siegel, R, Ward, E, Hao, Y, Xu, J, Thun, MJ (2009) Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 59: pp. 225-249 CrossRef
- Levine, EA, Freimanis, RI, Perrier, ND, Morton, K, Lesko, NM, Bergman, S (2003) Positron emission mammography: initial clinical results. Ann Surg Oncol 10: pp. 86-91 CrossRef
- Rosen, EL, Turkington, TG, Soo, MS, Baker, JA, Coleman, RE (2005) Detection of primary breast carcinoma with a dedicated, large-field-of-view FDG PET mammography device: initial experience. Radiology 234: pp. 527-534 CrossRef
- Tafra, L, Cheng, Z, Uddo, J, Lobrano, MB, Stein, W, Berg, WA (2005) Pilot clinical trial of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission mammography in the surgical management of breast cancer. Am J Surg 190: pp. 628-632 CrossRef
- Berg, WA, Gutierrez, L, NessAiver, MS, Carter, WB, Bhargavan, M, Lewis, RS (2004) Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology 233: pp. 830-849 CrossRef
- Vranjesevic, D, Schiepers, C, Silverman, DH, Quon, A, Villalpando, J, Dahlborn, M (2003) Relationship between 18F-FDG uptake and breast density in women with normal breast tissue. J Nucl Med 44: pp. 1238-1242
- Kumar, R, Mitchell, S, Alavi, A (2004) 18F-FDG uptake and breast density in women with normal breast tissue. J Nucl Med 45: pp. 1423
- Delille, JP, Slanetz, PJ, Yeh, ED, Kopans, DB, Garrido, L (2005) Physiologic changes in breast magnetic resonance imaging during the menstrual cycle: perfusion imaging, signal enhancement, and influence of the T1 relaxation time of the breast tissue. Breast J 11: pp. 236-241 CrossRef
- Mavi, A, Cermik, TF, Urhan, M, Puskulcu, H, Basu, S, Cucchiara, AJ (2010) The effect of age, menopausal state, and breast density on (18)F-FDG uptake in normal glandular breast tissue. J Nucl Med 51: pp. 347-352 CrossRef
- Wahl, RL (2001) Current status of PET in breast cancer imaging, staging, and therapy. Semin Roentgenol 36: pp. 250-260 CrossRef
- Avril, N, Rosé, CA, Schelling, M, Dose, J, Kühn, W, Bense, S (2000) Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol 18: pp. 3495-3502
- Mavi, A, Urhan, M, Yu, JQ, Zhuang, H, Houseni, M, Cermik, TF (2006) Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging detects breast cancer with high sensitivity and correlates well with histologic subtypes. J Nucl Med 47: pp. 1440-1446
- Zytoon, AA, Murakami, K, El-Kholy, MR, El-Shorbagy, E (2008) Dual time point FDG-PET/CT imaging. Potential tool for diagnosis of breast cancer. Clin Radiol 63: pp. 1213-1227 CrossRef
- Mankoff, DA, Dunnwald, LK, Kinahan, P (2003) Are we ready for dedicated breast imaging approaches?. J Nucl Med 44: pp. 594-595
- Berg, WA, Blume, JD, Adams, AM, Jong, RA, Barr, RG, Lehrer, DE (2010) Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology 254: pp. 79-87 CrossRef
- Lee, SG, Orel, SG, Woo, IJ, Cruz-Jove, E, Putt, ME, Solin, LJ (2003) MR imaging screening of the contralateral breast in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer: preliminary results. Radiology 226: pp. 773-778 CrossRef
- Lehman, CD, Blume, JD, Thickman, D, Bluemke, DA, Pisano, E, Kuhl, C (2005) Added cancer yield of MRI in screening the contralateral breast of women recently diagnosed with breast cancer: results from the International Breast Magnetic Resonance Consortium (IBMC) trial. J Surg Oncol 92: pp. 9-15 CrossRef
- Lehman, CD, Gatsonis, C, Kuhl, CK, Hendrick, RE, Pisano, ED, Hanna, L (2007) MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356: pp. 1295-1303 CrossRef
- Liberman, L, Morris, EA, Kim, CM, Kaplan, JB, Abramson, AF, Menell, JH (2003) MR imaging findings in the contralateral breast of women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180: pp. 333-341
- Han, BK, Schnall, MD, Orel, SG, Rosen, M (2008) Outcome of MRI-guided breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191: pp. 1798-1809 CrossRef
- Schell, AM, Rosenkranz, K, Lewis, PJ (2009) Role of breast MRI in the preoperative evaluation of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192: pp. 1438-1444 CrossRef
- Raylman, RR, Majewski, S, Smith, MF, Proffitt, J, Hammond, W, Srinivasan, A (2008) The positron emission mammography/tomography breast imaging and biopsy system (PEM/PET): design, construction and phantom-based measurements. Phys Med Biol 53: pp. 637-653 CrossRef
- Brem, RF, Petrovitch, I, Rapelyea, JA, Young, H, Teal, C, Kelly, T (2007) Breast-specific gamma imaging with 99mTc-sestamibi and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of breast cancer—a comparative study. Breast J 13: pp. 465-469 CrossRef
- Brem, RF, Floerke, AC, Rapelyea, JA, Teal, C, Kelly, T, Mathur, V (2008) Breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct imaging modality for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology 247: pp. 651-657 CrossRef
- Positron emission mammography in breast cancer presurgical planning: comparisons with magnetic resonance imaging
- Open Access
- Available under Open Access This content is freely available online to anyone, anywhere at any time.
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Volume 38, Issue 1 , pp 23-36
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Radiology Department, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, 800 Meadows Road, Boca Raton, FL, 33486, USA
- 2. Naviscan, Inc., San Diego, CA, 92121, USA
- 3. National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, 20892-2580, USA