Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET in Breast Cancer

  • Chapter
PET/CT

  • 1273 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Greenlee RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer statistics, 2001. Ca-A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2001;51:15–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. American Cancer Society. Estimated new cancer cases and deaths by sex for all sites, US, 2004. American Cancer Society; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, et al. Staging system for breast cancer: revisions for the sixth edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Surg Clin North Am 2003;83:803.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Woodward WA, Strom EA, Tucker SL, et al. Changes in the 2003 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging for breast cancer dramatically affect stage-specific survival. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:3244–3248.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wahl RL, Cody RL, Hutchins GD, Mudgett EE. Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabeled glucose analogue 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology 1991;179:765–770.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nieweg OE, Kim EE, Wong WH, et al. Positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-deoxyglucose in the detection and staging of breast cancer. Cancer 1993;71:3920–3925.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3495–3502.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Samson DJ, Flamm CR, Pisano ED, Aronson N. Should FDG PET be used to decide whether a patient with an abnormal mammogram or breast finding at physical examination should undergo biopsy? Acad Radiol 2002;9:773–783.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Adler LP, Weinberg IN, Bradbury MS, et al. Method for combined FDG-PET and radiographic imaging of primary breast cancers. Breast J 2003;9:163–166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Levine EA, Freimanis RI, Perrier ND, et al. Positron emission mammography: initial clinical results. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:86–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Raylman RR, Majewski S, Weisenberger AG, et al. Positron emission mammographyguided breast biopsy. J Nucl Med 2001;42:960–966.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rosen EL, Turkington T, Soo MS, Baker JA, Coleman RE. Detection of primary breast carcinoma with a dedicated large field of view FDG-PET mammography device: initial experience. Radiology 2005;234:527–534.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Smith MF, Raylman RR, Majewski S, Weisenberger AG. Positron emission mammography with tomographic acquisition using dual planar detectors: initial evaluations. Phys Med Biol 2004;49:2437–2452.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Murthy K, Aznar M, Thompson CJ, Loutfi A, Lisbona R, Gagnon JH. Results of preliminary clinical trials of the positron emission mammography system PEM-I: a dedicated breast imaging system producing glucose metabolic images using FDG. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1851–1858.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Murthy K, Aznar M, Bergman AM, et al. Positron emission mammographic instrument: initial results. Radiology 2000;215:280–285.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Thompson CJ, Murthy K, Aznar M, Lisbona R, Loutfi A. Preliminary clinical evaluation of an instrument for “positron emission mammography” in the detection of breast cancer. Clin Positron Imaging 1998;1:265.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Doshi NK, Shao Y, Silverman RW, Cherry SR. Design and evaluation of an LSO PET detector for breast cancer imaging. Med Phys 2000;27:1535–1543.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Eubank WB, Mankoff DA. Current and future uses of positron emission tomography in breast cancer imaging. Semin Nucl Med 2004;34:224–240.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zangheri B, Messa C, Picchio M, Gianolli L, Landoni C, Fazio F. PET/CT and breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31(Suppl 1):S135–142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Siggelkow W, Rath W, Buell U, Zimny M. FDG PET and tumour markers in the diagnosis of recurrent and metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31(Suppl 1):S118–124.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lind P, Igerc I, Beyer T, Reinprecht P, Hausegger K. Advantages and limitations of FDG PET in the follow-up of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31(Suppl 1):S125–134.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kamel EM, Wyss MT, Fehr MK, von Schulthess GK, Goerres GW. [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with suspected recurrence of breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2003;129:147–153.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Eubank WB, Mankoff DA, Takasugi J, et al. (18)Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to detect mediastinal or internal mammary metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3516–3523.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Isasi CR, Moadel RM, Blaufox MD. A meta-analysis of FDG-PET for the evaluation of breast cancer recurrence and metastases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005;90:105–112.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Vranjesevic D, Filmont JE, Meta J, et al. Whole-body F-18-FDG PET and conventional imaging for predicting outcome in previously treated breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2002;43:325–329.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Dose J, Bleckmann C, Bachmann S, et al. Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and “conventional diagnostic procedures” for the detection of distant metastases in breast cancer patients. Nucl Med Commun 2002;23:857–864.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Goerres GW, Michel SCA, Fehr MK, et al. Follow-up of women with breast cancer: comparison between MRI and FDG PET. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1635–1644.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gallowitsch HJ, Kresnik E, Gasser J, et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positrone-mission tomography in the diagnosis of tumor recurrence and metastases in the follow-up of patients with breast carcinoma: a comparison to conventional imaging. Invest Radiol 2003;38:250–256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. van der Hoeven JJM, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, et al. F-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in staging of locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1253–1259.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Schirrmeister H, Kuhn T, Guhlmann A, et al. Fluorine-18 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET in the preoperative staging of breast cancer: comparison with the standard staging procedures. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:351–358.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Bellon JR, Livingston RB, Eubank WB, et al. Evaluation of the internal mammary lymph nodes by FDG-PET in locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). Am J Clin Oncol 2004;27:407–410.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Eubank WB, Mankoff DA, Shanley TJ, et al. Risk factors associated with metastasis to mediastinal or internal mammary (IM) nodes detected at FDG PET in breast cancer patients suspected of locoregional spread of disease. J Nucl Med 2000;41:28P.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Eubank WB, Mankoff D, Bhattacharya M, et al. Impact of FDG PET on defining the extent of disease and on the treatment of patients with recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;183:479–486.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Wahl RL, Siegel BA, Coleman RE, Gatsonis CG. Prospective multicenter study of axillary nodal staging by positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a report of the Staging Breast Cancer with PET Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:277–285.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. van der Hoeven JJM, Hoekstra OS, Comans EFI, et al. Determinants of diagnostic performance of [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for axillary staging in breast cancer. Ann Surg 2002;236:619–624.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Crippa F, Gerali A, Alessi A, Agresti R, Bombardieri E. FDG-PET for axillary lymph node staging in primary breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31(Suppl 1):S97–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schelling M, Avril N, Nahrig J, et al. Positron emission tomography using [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1689–1695.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, et al. Positron emission tomography using [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1676–1688.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Stafford SE, Gralow JR, Schubert EK, et al. Use of serial FDG PET to measure the response of bone-dominant breast cancer to therapy. Acad Radiol 2002;9:913–921.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kim SJ, Kim SK, Lee ES, Ro J, Kang S. Predictive value of [18F]FDG PET for pathological response of breast cancer to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 2004;15:1352–1357.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Vranjesevic D, Filmont JE, Schiepers C, et al. Prognostic value of FDG-PET for predicting the outcome of re-staged breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2001;42:81P.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Oshida M, Uno K, Suzuki M, et al. Predicting the prognoses of breast carcinoma patients with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-fluoro[F-18]-D-glucose. Cancer. 1998;82:2227–2234.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Biersack HJ, Bender H, Palmedo H. FDG-PET in monitoring therapy of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:S112–117.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Yap CS, Seltzer MA, Schiepers C, et al. Impact of whole-body F-18-FDG PET on staging and managing patients with breast cancer: the referring physician’s perspective. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1334–1337.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Bos R, van der Hoeven JJM, van der Wall E, et al. Biologic correlates of (18)fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:379–387.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by (18)FDG PET: differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:3375–3379.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ, Kao CH, Lin CC, Lee CC. Comparing whole body F-18-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99 m methylene diphosphonate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2002;128:325–328.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Mourtzikos K, Wahl RL. Initial experience with FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2003;44:394p [abstract].

    Google Scholar 

  49. Buck A, Wahl A, Eischer U, et al. Combined morphological and functional imaging with FDG PET/CT for restaging breast cancer: impact on patient management. J Nucl Med 2003;44:78p [abstract].

    Google Scholar 

  50. Lonneux M, Borbath I, Berlière M, Kirkove C, Pauwels S. The place of whole-body PET FDG for the diagnosis of distant recurrence of breast cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2000;3:45–49.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Vranjesevic D, Schiepers C, Silverman DH, et al. Relationship between F-18-FDG uptake and breast density in women with normal breast tissue. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1238–1242.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Hicks RJ, Binns D, Stabin MG. Pattern of uptake and excretion of F-18-FDG in the lactating breast. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1238–1242.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Buck AK, Schirrmeister H, Mattfeldt T, Reske SN. Biological characterisation of breast cancer by means of PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31(Suppl 1):S80–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Mortimer JE, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, Trinkaus K, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ. Metabolic flare: indicator of hormone responsiveness in advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:2797–2803.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Cook GJR, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in cancer patients by F-18-fluoride and F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Q J Nucl Med 2001;45:47–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Moadel RM, Nguyen AV, Lin EY, et al. Positron emission tomography agent 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose has a therapeutic potential in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2003;5:R199–205.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA

    Bennett B. Chin MD (Associate Professor)

  2. Department of Radiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

    Ronald B. Workman Jr. MD (Resident)

  3. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA

    R. Edward Coleman MD (Professor and Department of Radiology, Director of Nuclear Medicine)

Authors
  1. Bennett B. Chin MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ronald B. Workman Jr. MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. Edward Coleman MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

    Ronald B. Workman Jr. MD (Resident) (Resident)

  2. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA

    R. Edward Coleman MD (Professor Department of Radiology and Director of Nuclear Medicine) (Professor Department of Radiology and Director of Nuclear Medicine)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chin, B.B., Workman, R.B., Coleman, R.E. (2006). Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET in Breast Cancer. In: Workman, R.B., Coleman, R.E. (eds) PET/CT. Springer, New York, NY . https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-38335-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-38335-4_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-32166-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-38335-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation