European Journal of Nuclear Medicine

, Volume 24, Issue 7, pp 809–824 | Cite as

Nuclear medicine techniques for the study of breast cancer

  • Emilio Bombardieri
  • Flavio Crippa
  • Lorenzo Maffioli
  • Marco Greco
Review Article

Keywords

Public Health Breast Cancer Nuclear Medicine Nuclear Medicine Technique 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ciatto S, Rosselli del Turco M, Bravetti P. Nonpalpable breast lesions: stereotaxic fine needle aspiration cytology.Radiology 1989; 173: 57–59.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fajardo LL, Davis JR, Wiens JL, Trego DC. Mammographyguided stereotactic fine-needle aspiration cytology of nonpalpable breast lesions: prospective comparison with surgical biopsy results.AJR 1990; 155: 977–981.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tulusan AH. Mammographic-pathological correlations. In: Friedrich M, Sickles EA, eds.Radiological diagnosis of breast diseases. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer; 1997: 13–32.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schreer I, Frischbier J. Breast cancer screening projects: results. In: Friedrich M, Sickles EA, eds.Radiological diagnosis of breast diseases. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer; 1997: 333–346.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Teubner J. Echomammography: technique and results. In: Friedrich M, Sickles EA, eds.Radiological diagnosis of breast diseases. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer; 1997: 181–220.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bauer M, Tontsch P, Schulz-Wendtland R. Fine-needle aspiration and core biopsy. In: Friedrich M, Sickles EA, eds.Radiological diagnosis of breast diseases. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer; 1997: 291–298.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oestmann JW. Digital mammography. In: Friedrich M, Sickles EA, eds.Radiological diagnosis of breast diseases. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer; 1997: 65–74.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Beck R. Clinical application of contrast-enhanced MRI. In: Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Beck R, eds. Contrast-enhanced MRI of the breast. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer; 1996: 157–204.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rigo P, Paulus P, Kaschten BJ, Hustinx R, Bury T, Jerusalem G, Benoit T, Foidart-Willens J. Oncological applications of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 1641–1674.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ege GN. Lymphoscintigraphy: techniques and applications in the management of breast cancer.Semin Nucl Med 1983; 13: 26–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Unlu M, Ercan MT, Alanyali H, Akhan O, Bedkik CF, Allan SM. The prospects for imaging lymph nodes in breast cancer.Europ J Nucl Med 1992; 19: 836–837.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Terui S, Yamamoto H. New simplified lymphoscintigraphy technique in patients with breast cancer.J Nucl Med 1989; 30: 1198–1204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McLean R, Ege G. Prognostic value of axillary lymphoscintigraphy in breast carcinoma patients.J Nuel Med 1986; 27: 1116–1124.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hill N, Ege G, Greyson N, Mahoney L, Jirsch D. Predicting nodal metastases in breast cancer by lymphoscintigraphy.Can J Surgery 1983; 26: 507–509.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Casara D, Rubella D, Saladini G, Masarotto G, Calzavara F. Significance of internal mammary lymphoscintigraphy (IML) in clinical staging and prognosis of breast cancer.Eur J Lymphology 1992; 3: 103–109.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karayalcin B, Aras G, Erbay G, Erean MT. Parasternal lymphoscintigraphy using99mTc-dextran.Nucl Med Communication 1988; 9: 657–662.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mazzeo F, Accurso A, Petrella G, Capuano S, Maurelli L, Celentano L, Squame G, Salvatore M. Pre-operative axillary lymphoscintigraphy in breast cancer: experience with subareolar injection of99mTc-nanocolloid albumin.Nucl Med Commun 1986; 1: 5–16.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Del Castillo RA, Kuschnir E, Figueras S, Ferreyra R. Lymphoscintigraphies of the internal mammary ganglion chain: our experience.Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1986; 7: 82–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tomasello R, Mesiti M, La Torre F, Trovatello T, Picciotto M, Zanghì M, Torchia U, Pastura G. Linfoscintigrafia ascellare preoperatoria nel canceo della mammella.Acta Oncol 1995; 16: 53–56.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Uren RE, Howman-Giles RB, Thompson JF, Malouf D, Ramsey-Stewart G, Niesche FW, Renwick SB. Mammary lymphoscintigraphy in breast cancer.J Nucl Med 1995; 36: 1775–1780.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alazraki N. Lymphoscintigraphy and the intraoperative gamma probe.J Nucl Med 1995; 36: 1780–1783.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Morton D, Wen D, Cochran A. Management of early-stage melanoma by intraoperative lymphatic mapping and selective lymphoadenectomy: an alternative routine elective lymphoadenectomy or “watch and wait”.Surg Oncol Clin North Am 1992; 1: 247–259.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morton D, Wen D, Wong J. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma.Arch Surg 1992; 127: 392–399.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Giuliano AE, Dale PS, Turner RR, Morton DL, Evans SW, Krasne DL. Improved axillary staging of breast cancer with sentinel lymphoadenectomy.Ann Surg 1995; 222: 394–401.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Van Der Veen H, Hoekstra OS, Paul MA, Cuesta MA, Meijer S. Gamma probe-guided sentinel node biopsy to select patients with melanoma for lymphoadenectomy.Br J Surg 1994; 81: 1769–1770.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Krag DN, Weaver DL, Alex JC, Fairbank JT. Surgical resection and radiolocalization of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer using a gamma probe.Surg Oncol 1993; 2: 335–340.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    De Cicco C, Cremonesi M, Chinol M, Bartolomei M, Pizzamiglio M, Leonardi L, Fiorenza M, Paganelli G. Optimization of axillary lymphoscintigraphy to detect the sentinel node in breast cancer.Tumori 1997; 83: 539–541.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hayes DF. Axillary lymphoscintigraphy for breast cancer: should we do it? Can we do it?J Nucl Med 1990; 31: 1835–1838.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Parker R, Keenan A, Dower S. Targeting of murine radiolabelled monoclonal antibodies in the lymphatics.Cancer Res 1987; 47: 2073–2076.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Engelstad B, Spitler L, Del Rio M. Phase I immunolymphoscintigraphy with an111In-labelled antimelanoma monoclonal antibody.Radiology 1986; 161: 419–422.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thompson C, Stacker S, Salehi N. Immunoscintigraphy for the detection of lymph node metastases from breast cancer.Lancet 1984; 2: 1245–1247.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mandeville R, Pteisky N, Phillip K, Kubista E, Dumas F, Grouix B. Immunolymphoscintigraphy of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients using monoclonal antibodies: first clinical findings.Anticancer Res 1986; 6: 1257–1264.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tjandra JJ, Russel IS, Collins JP Andrews JT, Lichyenstein M, Binns D, McKenzie IFC. Immunoscintilymphography for the detection of lymph node metastases from breast cancer.Cancer Res 1989; 49: 1600–1608.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Athanassiou A, Pectasides D, Peteniotis K, Tzimis L, Natsis P, Lafi A, Arapantom P, Koutsiouba P, Taylor-Papadimitriou J, Epenetos A. Immunoscintigraphy with I-131 labelled HMFG2 and HMFG1 F(ab′)2 in the pre-operative detection of clinical and subclinical metastases in breast cancer patients.Int J Cancer 1988; 3: 89–95.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kareimo KJA. Immunolymphoscintigraphy for the detection of lymph node metastases from breast cancer.Cancer Res 1989; 49: 1600–1608.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bischof Delaloye A, Delaloye B. Radiolabelled monoclonal antibodies in tumour imaging and therapy: out of fashion?Eur J Nucl Med 1995; 22 (6): 571–580.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    DeLand F, Goldenberg DM. Diagnosis and treatment of neoplasms with radionuclide-labelled antibodies.Semin Nucl Med 1985;15:2–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bombardieri E, Gasparini M, Massaron S, Grasselli G, Castellani MR, Seregni E. Studio immunoscintigrafico delle neoplasie maligne.Argom Oncol 1995; 16: 119–148.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Buraggi GL, Seregni E. Radioimmunodetection of tumours with radiolabelled monoclonal antibodies: basic aspects and clinical applications. In: D'Amico P, ed.Clinical applications of radiolabelled antibodies in oncology, Milano: Wichtig Editore; 1994: 9–35.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Goldenberg DM, Larson SM. Radioimmunodetection in cancer identification.J Nucl Med 1992; 33: 803–814.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Crippa F, Agresti R, Bombardieri E, Seregni E, Chiti A, Greco M, Andreola S, Buraggi GL, Veronesi U. Preliminary results of pre-axillary radioimmunoscintigraphy with In-111 B72.3 in breast cancer.Int J Oncol 1995; 6: 791–795.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lind P, Smola MG, Lechner P, Ratschek M, Klima G, Koltringer P, Steindorfer P, Eber O. The immunoscintigraphic use of Tc-99m labelled monoclonal anti CEA antibodies in patients with suspected primary, recurrent and metastatic breast cancer.Int J Cancer 1991; 47: 865–869.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Major PP, Dion AS, Williams CJ, Mattes MJ, Wang T, Rosenthall L. Breast tumour radioimmunodetection with a111In-la-belled monoclonal antibody (MA5) against a mutin-like antigen.Cancer Res 1990; 50: 927–931.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kalofonos HP, Sackier JM, Hattzistilianou M, Pervez S, Taylor Papadimitriou J, Waxman JH, Lavender JP, Wood C, Epenetos AA. Kinetics, quantitative analysis and radioimmunolocalisation using indium 111-HMFGI monoclonal antibody in patients with breast cancer.Br J Cancer 1989; 59: 939–942.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lamki LM, Buzdar AU, Singletary SE, Rosenblum MG, Bhadkamkar V, Esparza L, Podoloff DA, Zukiwski A, Hortobagi GN, Murray JL. Indium-111-labelled B72.3 monoclonal antibody in the detection and staging of breast cancer: a phase I study.J Nucl Med 1991; 32: 1326–1332.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rosner D, Nabi H, Wild L, Ortman-Nabi J, Hreshchyshyn NM. Diagnosis of breast carcinoma with radiolabelled monoclonal antibodies to carcinoembryonic antigen and human milk fat globulin (HMFG).Cancer Invest 1995; 13: 573–582.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Allan SM, Dean C, Fernando I, Eccles S, Styles J, Mc Cready VR, Baum M, Sacks N. Radioimmunolocalisation in breast cancer using the gene product of c-ercB2 as the target antigen.Brit J Cancer 1993; 67: 706–712.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Allan SM, Dean CJ, Eccles S, Sacks NP. Clinical radioimmunolocalisation with a rat monoclonal antibody directed against c-erbB-2.Cell Biophysics 1994; 24: 93–98.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Villarreal RF, Parkey RW, Bonte FJ. Experimental pertechnetate mammography.Radiology 1994; 111: 657–661.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Richman SD, Brodey PA, Frankel RS, De Moss EV, Tormey DC, Johnston GS. Breast scintigraphy with Tc-99m pertechnetate and Ga-67 citrate.J Nucl Med 1975; 16: 293–299.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Serafini AN, Raskin MM, Zand LC, Watson DD. Radionuclide breast scanning in carcinoma of the breast.J Nucl Med 1974; 15: 1149–1152.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Den Outer AJ, Pauwels EK, Zwavelig A, Puylaert JB, Hermans J, De Lange EE. Breast scintigraphy with99mTc diethylene triamine penta-acetic acid for the detection of malignant diseases.Br J Surgery 1986; 73: 613–614.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Piccolo S, Lastoria S, Mainolfi C, Muto P, Bazzicalupo L, Salvatore M. Technetium 99m-methylene diphosphonate scintimammography to image primary breast cancer.J Nucl Med 1995; 35: 718–724.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Tonani N, Hisda K. Clinical experience of tumour imaging with thallium-201-chloride.Clin Nucl Med 1977; 2: 75–81.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sehweil AM, McKillop JH, Milroy R, Sayed MA, Ziada G, Banham SW, Davidson KG, Ragib A, Omar YT, Abdel Dayem HM. Thallium scintigraphy in the staging of lung cancer, breast cancer and lymphoma.Nucl Med Commun 1990; 11:263–269.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Waxman AD, Ramanna L, Brachman MB. Thallium scintigraphy in primary carcinoma of the breast: evaluation of primary and axillary metastasis.J Nucl Med 1989; 30: 844–848.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Waxman AD, Ramanna L, Memsic LD, Foster CE, Silberman AW, Gleischman SH, Brenner RJ, Brachman MB, Kuhar CJ, Yadegar J. Thallium scintigraphy in the evaluation of mass abnormality of the breast.J Nucl Med 1993; 34: 18–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Lee VW, Sax EJ, McAneny DB, Pollack S, Blanchard RA, Beazley RM, Kavanah MT, Ward R.J. A complementary role for thallium 201 scintigraphy with mammography in the diagnosis of breast cancer.J Nucl Med 1993; 34: 2095–2100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Maffioli L, Steens J, Pawels E, Bombardieri E. Applications of99mTc-SestaMIBI in oncology.Tumori 1996; 82: 12–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Chiti A, Maffioli L, Castellani M, Gasparini M, Capri G, Bombardieri E. Case report: technetium-99m-hexakis-2-methoxy-isobutyl-isonitrile imaging of breast cancer and myocardial infarction in the same patient.Tumori 1994; 80: 480–481.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Plans EA, North TL, Pickett RD, Kelly JD. Mechanism of uptake of technetium-tetrofosmin. I.- Uptake into isolated adult rat ventricular myocytes and subcellular localization.J Nucl Cardiol 1995; 2: 317–326.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Younes A, Songadele JA, Maublant J, Platts E, Pickett R, Veyre A. Mechanism of uptake of technetium-tetrofosmin. II: Uptake into isolated adult rat heart mitochondria.J Nucl Cardiol 1995; 2: 327–333.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rambaldi PF, Mansi L, Procaccini E, Di Gregorio F, Del Vecchio E. Breast cancer detection with Tc-99m tetrofosmin.Clin Nucl Med 1995; 20: 703–705.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Khalkhali I, Mena I, Jouanne E, Diggles L, Venegas R, Block J, Alle K, Klein S. Prone scintimammography in patients with suspicion of carcinoma of the breast.J Am Coll Surg 1994; 178: 491–497.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Khalkhali I, Cutrone JA, Mena IG, Diggles LE, Venegas RJ, Vargas HI, Jackson BL, Khalkhali S, Moss JF, Klein SR. Scintimammography: the complementary role of Tc-99m SestaMIBI prone breast imaging for the diagnosis of breast carcinoma.Radiology 1995; 196: 421–426.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 166.
    Khalkhali I, Villanueva-Meyer S, Edell L, Hanelin LG, Lugo CE, Taillefer R, Freeman LM, Neal CE, Scheff AM, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ, Baum JK, Houlihan MJ, Hale CA, Haber SB. Diagnostic accuracy of Tc-99m sestamibi breast imaging in breast cancer detection [abstract].J Nucl Med 1996; 37: 74P.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Khalkhali I, Cutrone I, Mena I, Diggles L, Khalkhali S, Venegas R, Klein S. The usefulness of scintimammography in patients with dense breast on mammogram [abstract].J Nucl Med 1995; 36: 52P.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Burak Z, Argon M, Memis A, Erdem S, Balkan Z, Duman Y, Ustun E.E, Erhan Y, Ozkilic H. Evaluation of palpable breast masses with 99Tcm-MIBI: a comparative study with mammography and ultrasonography.Nuc Med Commun 1994; 15: 604–612.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Kao CH, Wang SJ, Liu TJ. The use of technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile breast scintigraphy to evaluate palpable breast masses.Eur J Nucl Med 1994; 21: 432–436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Palmedo H, Grunwald F, Bender H, Schonburg A, Mallman P, Krebs D, Biersack H.J. Scintimammography with technetium99m methoxyisobutyl isonitrile: comparison with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23:940–946.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Taillefer R, Robidoux A, Lambert R, Turpin S, Laperriere J. Technetium-99m-sestamibi prone scintimammography to detect primary breast cancer and axillary lymph node involvement.J Nucl Med 1995; 36: 1758–1765.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lu G, Shih WJ, Huang HY, Long MQ, Sun Q, Liu YK, Chou C. 99mTc-MIBI mammoscintigraphy of breast masses: early and delayed imaging.Nucl Med Commun 1995; 16: 150–156.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Lam WWM, Yang WT, Chan YL, Stewart IET, Metreweli C, King W. Detection of axillary lymph node metastases in breast carcinoma by technetium-99m sestamibi breast scintigraphy, ultrasound and conventional mammography.Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:498–503.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Maffioli L, Agresti R, Chiti A, Crippa F, Gasparini M, Bombardieri E. Prone scintimammography in patients with nonpalpable breast lesions.Anticancer Res 1996; 16: 1269–1274.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Aktolun C, Bayhan H, Kir M. Clinical experience with Tc99m MIBI imaging in patients with malignant tumours: preliminary results and comparison with T1-201.Clin Nucl Med 1992; 17: 171–176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Scopinaro F, Schillaci O, Scarpini M, Mingazzini PL, Di Macio L, Banci M, Danieli R, Zerilli M, Limiti MR, Centi Colella A. Technetium-99m sestamibi: an indicator of breast cancer invasiveness.Eur J Nucl Med 1994; 21: 984–987.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Moretti JL, Caglar M, Duran-Cordobes M, Morere JF. Can nuclear medicine predict response to chemotherapy?Eur J Nucl Med 1995; 22: 97–100.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Maffioli L, Seregni E, Chiti A, Nerini Molteni S, Crippa F, Botti C, Bogni A, Agresti R, Bombardieri E. Radiopharmaceuticals for breast cancer imaging.Tumori 1997; 83: 512–514.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Mansi L, Rambaldi PF, Procaccini E, Di Gregorio F, Laprovitera A, Pecori B, Del Vecchio W. Scintimammography with technetium-99m tetrofosmin in the diagnosis of breast cancer and lymph node metastases.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 932–939.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kenady DE, Pavlik EJ, Nelson K, van Nagell JR, Gallion H, De Priest PD, Ryo UK, Baranczuk RJ. Images of estrogen-receptor-positive breast tumours produced by estradiol labelled with iodine I 123 at 16 alpha.Arch Surg 1993; 128: 1373–1381.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Scheidhauer K, Muller S, Smolarz K, Brautigam P, Briele B. Tumour scintigraphy using123I-labelled estradiol in breast cancer-receptor scintigraphy.Nuklearmedizin 1991; 30: 84–99.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Rijks LJM, Boer GJ, Endert E, De Bruin K, Van Den Bos JC, Van Doremalen PAPM, Schoonen WGEJ, Janssen AGM, Van Royen EA. The stereoisomers of α-[123I]iodovinylestradiol and its 11β-methoxy derivative evaluated for their estrogen receptor binding in human MCF-7 cells and rat uterus, and their distribution in immature rats.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 295–307.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Rijks LJM, Van Tienhoven G, Noorduyin LA, De Bruin K, Boer GJ, Janssen AGM, Van Royen EA. Imaging of primary breast cancer with the estrogen receptor specific radioligand Z-[I-123]MIVE.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 1096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Rijks LJM, Bakker PJM, Veenhof CHN, Boer GJ, De Bruin K, Janssen AGM, Van Royen EA. Imaging of recurrent or metastatic breast cancer with the estrogen receptor specific ligand Z-[I-123]MIVE.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 1226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Rijks LJM, Van Tienhoven G, Bakker PJM, Veenhof CHN, Noorduyin LA, Janssen AGM, Van Royen EA. Imaging of tumours in breast cancer patients with the estrogen receptor specific radioligand Z-[I-123]MIVE.Eur J Cancer 1996; 32A Suppl 2: 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Van Eijck CH, Krenning EP, Bootsma A, Oei HY, Van Pel R, Lindemans J, Jeekel J, Reubi JC, Lamberts SWJ. Somatostatin-receptor scintigraphy in primary breast cancer.Lancet 1994; 343: 640–643.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Chiti A, Agresti R, Maffioli L, Tomasic G, Savelli G, Crippa F, Pilotti S, Greco M, Bombardieri E. Breast cancer staging using technetium-99m sestamibi and indium-111 pentetreotide single-photon emission tomography.Eur J Nucl Med 1997; 24: 192–196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Crippa F, Pascali C, Chiesa C, De Sanctis V, Bogni A, Decise D, Bombardieri E. Caratteristiche e possibili applicazioni della tomografia ad emissione di positroni in oncologia clinica.Argom Oncol 1995; 16: 389–404.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Jones T. The role of positron emission tomography within the spectrum of medical imaging.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 207–211.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Beaney RP, Lammertsma AA, Hones T, Mc Kenzie CG, Halnan KE. Positron emission tomography for in vivo measurement of regional blood flow, oxygen utilisation, and blood volume in patients with breast carcinoma.Lancet 1984; 1: 131–134.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Mintun MA, Welch MJ, Siegel BA, Mathias CJ, Brodack JW, Mc Guire AH, Katzenellenbogen JA. Breast cancer: PET imaging of estrogen receptors.Radiology 1988; 169: 45–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    McGuire AH, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, Lyss AP, Brodack JW, Mathias CJ, Mintun MA, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ. Positron tomographic assessment of 16α-[18F]-fluoro-17 betaestradiol uptake in metastatic breast carcinoma.J Nucl Med 1991; 32: 1526–1531.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Dehdashti F, Mortimer JE, Siegel BA, Griffeth LK, Bonasera TJ, Fusselman MJ, Detert DD, Cutler PD, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ. Positron tonographic assessment of estrogen receptors in breast cancer: comparison with FDG-PET and in vitro receptor assays.J Nucl Med 1995; 36: 1766–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F, Mortimer JE, Siegel BA, Jonson S, Welch MI. PET assessment of response to tamoxifen therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer.J Nucl Med 1996; 37: 99P.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Van Brocklin HE, Pomper MG, Carlson KE, Welch MJ, Katzenellenbogen JA. Preparation and evaluation of 17-ethinyl-substituted 16α-[18F]fluoroestradiols: selective receptorbased PET imaging agents.Nucl Med Biol 1992; 19: 363–374.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Van Brocklin HF, Carlson KE, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ. 16β-[18F[Fluoro estrogens: systematic investigation of a new series of fluorine-l8-labelled estrogens as potential imaging agents for estrogen-receptor-positive breast tumours.J Med Chem 1993; 36: 1619–1629.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Van Brocklin HF, Roque PA, Lee HV, Carlson KE, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MI. 16α-[18F[Fluoromoxestrol: a potent, metabolically stable positron emission tomography imaging agent for estrogen receptor positive human breast tumours.Life Sci 1993; 53: 811–819.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Kiesewetter DO, Kilbourn MR, Landvatter SV, Heiman DF, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ. Preparation of four fluorine-18-labelled estrogens and their selective uptakes in target tissues of immature rats.J Nucl Med 1994; 25: 1212–1221.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Katzenellenbogen JA. The pharmacology of steroid radiopharmaceuticals: specific and non-specific binding and uptake selectivity. In: Nunn AD, ed.Radiophannaceuticals: chemistry and pharmacology. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1992: 297–331.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    French AN, Napolitano E, Van Brocklin HF, Hanson RN, Welch MJ, Katzenellenbogen JA. Synthesis, radiolabelling and tissue distribution of 11α-fluoroalkyl- and 11α-fluoroalkoxy-substituted estrogens: target tissue and uptake selectivity and defluorination of a homologous series of fluorine-18-labelled estrogens.Nucl Med Biol 1993; 20: 31–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Dehdashti F, McGuire AH, Van Broclin HE, Siegel BA, Andriole DP, Griffeth LK, Pomper MG, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ. Assessment of 21-[18F]fluoro-16αethy1-19 norprogesterone as a positron-emitting radiopharmaceutical for the detection of progestin receptors in human breast carcinomas.J Nucl Med 1991; 32: 1532–1537.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Kochanny MJ, Van Brocklin HE, Kym PR, Carlson KE, O'Neil JP, Bonasera TA, Welch MJ, Katzenellenbogen JA. Fluorine-18-labelled progestin ketals: synthesis and target tissue uptake selectivity of potential imaging agents for receptor-positive breast tumours.J Med Chem 1993; 36: 1120–1127.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Pomper MG, Pinney KG, Carlson KE, Van Brocklin H, Mathias CJ, Welch MJ, Katzenellenbogen JA. Target tissue uptake selectivity of three fluorine-substituted progestins: potential imaging agents for receptor-positive breast tumours.Nucl Med Biol 1990; 17: 309–319.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Verhagen A, Studeny M, Lurtsema G. Metabolism of a [18F]fluorine labelled progestin (21-[18F]fluoro-16α-ethyl-19-norprogesterone) in humans: a clue for future investigations.Nucl Med Biol 1994; 21: 941–952.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Minn H, Soini I. [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose scintigraphy in diagnosis and follow up of treatment in advanced breast cancer.Eur J Nucl Med 1989; 15: 61–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Wahl RL, Cody RL, Hutchins GD, Kuhl DE. PET imaging of breast cancer with 18FDG.Radiology 1989; 173: 419.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Kubota K, Matsuzawa T, Amemiya A, Kondo M, Fujiwara T, Watanuki S, Ito M, Ido T. Imaging of breast cancer with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography.J Comput Assist Tomogr 1989; 13: 1097–1098.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Wahl RL, Cody R, Hutchins GD, Mudgett E. Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabelled glucose analog 2-(F-18)-fluorodeoxy-2-d-glucose (FDG).Radiology 1991; 179: 765–770.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Bruce DM, Evans NT, Heys SD, Needham J, Ben Younes H, Mikecz P, Smith FW, Sharp F, Eremin O. Positron emission tomography: 2-deoxy-2[18F]fluoro-d-glucose uptake in locally advanced breast cancers.Eur J Surg Oncol 1995; 21: 280–283.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Crowe JP, Adler LP, Shenk RR, Sunshine J. Positron emission tomography and breast masses: comparison with clinical mammographic and pathological findings.Ann Surg Oncol 1994; 1: 132–140.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Tse NY, Hob CK, Hawkins RA, Xinner MJ, Dahlbom M, Choi Y, Maddahi J, Brunicardi FC, Phelps ME, Glapsy JA. The application of positron emission tomographic imaging with fluorodeoxyglucose in the evaluation of breast disease.Ann Surg 1992; 21: 27–34.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Enhanced FDG-PET tumour imaging with correlation-coefficient filtered influx-constant images.Nucl Med 1996; 37: 371–374.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Nieweg OF, Wong WH, Singletary SE, Hortobagyi GN, Kim EE. Positron emission tomography of glucose metabolism in breast cancer. Potential for tumour detection, staging and evaluation of chemotherapy.Ann N Y Acad Sci 1993; 698: 423–428.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Nieweg OE, Kim EE, Wong WH, Broussard WF, Singletary SE, Hortobagyi GN, Tilbury RS. Positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-deoxyglucose in the detection and staging of breast cancer.Cancer 1993; 71: 3920–3925.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Adler LP, Crowe JP, Al-Kaisi NK, Sunshine JL. Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with (F-18)2-deoxy-2-fluoro-d-glucose PET.Radiology 1993; 187: 743–750.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Adler DD, Wahl RL. New methods for imaging the breast: techniques, findings, and potential.Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164: 19–30.Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Avril N, Janicke F, Dose J, Ziegler S, Bense S, Hertz M, Langhammer HR, Graeff H, Schweiger M. Imaging of breast tumours with FDG-PET in comparison with histology.Eur J Nucl Med 1994; 21: 749.Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Wahl RL, Helvie MA, Chang AE, Andersson I. Detection of breast cancer in women after augmentation mammoplasty using fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose-PET.J Nucl Med 1994; 35: 872–875.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Wahl RL, Kamiski MS, Ethier SP, Hutchins GD. The potential of 2-deoxy-2[18F]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) for the detection of tumour involvement in lymph nodes.J Nucl Med 1990; 31: 1831–1835.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Wahl RL, Cody RL, August D. Initial evaluation of FDG PET for the staging of the axilla in newly-diagnosed breast carcinoma patients.J Nucl Med 1991; 32: 981.Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Bombardieri E, Crippa F, Maffioli L, Chiti A, Castellani MR, Greco M, Agresti R, Bogni A, Chiesa C, De Sanctis V, Massaron S, Pascali C. Axillary lymph node metastases detection with nuclear medicine approaches in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer: can positron emission tomography (PET) with18F-FDG be considered as the best method?Int J Oncol 1996; 8: 693–699.Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Crippa F, Agresti R, Seregni E, Greco M, Pascali C, Bogni A, Chiesa C, De Sanctis V, Delle Donne V, Salvadori B, Leutner M, Bombardieri E. Prospective evaluation of F.18 FDG PET in presurgical staging of the axilla in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 1997 (in press)Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Utech CI, Young CS, Winter PF. Prospective evaluation of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in breast cancer for staging of the axilla related to sur gery and immunocytochemistry.Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 1588–1593.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Cady B. The need to reexamine axillary lymph node dissection in invasive breast cancer.Cancer 1994; 73: 505–508.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    March DE, Wechsler RJ, Kurtz AB, Rosenberg AL, Needleman L. CT-pathologic correlation of axillary lymph nodes in breast carcinoma.J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991; 15: 440–444.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Adler LP, Cascade E, Crowe J. Axillary lymph node involvement in breast cancer: a retrospective study. Abstract from the 1994 ICP Meeting, Institute for Clinical PET, Fairfax, Virginia.Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    Tse NY, Hoh CK, Hawkins RA, Zinner MJ, Dahlbom M, Choi Y, Maddahi J, Brunicardi FC, Phelps ME, Glapsy JA. The application of positron emission tomographic imaging with fluorodeoxyglucose to the evaluation of breast disease.Ann Surg 1992; 216: 27–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Hoh CK, Hawkins RA, Glapsy JA et al. Cancer detection with whole-body PET using 2-[18F]fluoro-2deoxy-d-glucose.J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993; 17: 582–589.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Petren-Mallmin M. Clinical and experimental imaging of breast cancer metastases in the spine.Acta Radiol Suppl 1994; 391: 1–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Wahl RL, Cody R, Hutchins G, Mudgett E. Positron emission tomographic scanning of primary and metastatic breast cancer with the radiolabelled glucose analogue 2-deoxy2[18F]fluoro-d-glucose.N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 200.Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Wahl RI, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography. Initial evaluation.J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 2101–2111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation.J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 2101–2111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Chaiken L, Rege S, Hoh C, Choi Y, Jabour B, Juillard G, Hawkins R, Parker R. Positron emission tomography with fluorodeoxyglucose to evaluate tumour response and control after radiation therapy.Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 27: 455–464.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Jansson T, Westlin JE, Ahlstrom H, Lilja A, Langstrom B, Bergh J. Positron emission tomography studies in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer: a method for early therapy evaluation?J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 1470–1477.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Leskinen-Kallio S, Nagren K, Lehikoinen P, Ruotsalainen U, Joensuu H. Uptake of11C-methionine in breast cancer studied by PET. An association with the size of S-phase fraction.Br J Cancer 1991; 64: 1121–1124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Huovinen R, Leskinen-Kallio S, Nagren K, Lehikoinen P, Ruotsalainen U, Teras M. Carbon-11-methionine and PET in evaluation of treatment response of breast cancer.Br J Cancer 1993; 67: 787–791.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Meyer GJ, Waters SL, Coenen HH, Luxen A, Maziere B, Langstrom B. PET radiopharmaceuticals in Europe: current use and data relevant for the formulation of summaries of product characteristics (SPCs).Eur J Nucl Med 1995; 22: 1420–1432.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Wilson CB, Snook DE, Dhokia B, Taylor CV, Watson IA, Lammertsma AA, Lambrecht R, Waxman J, Jones T, Epenetos AA. Quantitative measurement of monoclonal anti body distribution and blood flow using positron emission tomography and 124 iodine in patients with breast cancer.Int J Cancer 1991; 47: 344–347.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Bakir MA, Eccles SA, Babich JW, Aftab N, Styles JM, Dean CJ, Ott RJ. c-erbB2 protein overexpression in breast cancer as a target for PET using iodine-124-labelled monoclonal antibodies.J Nucl Med 1992; 33: 2154–2160.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Yang DJ, Kuang LR, Price JE, Buzdar AU, Tansey W, Cherif A, Gretzer M, Kim EE, Wallace S. Imaging, biodistribution and therapy potential of halogenated tamoxifen analogues.Life Sciences 1994; 55: 53–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Khalkhali I, Mena I, Diggles L. Review of imaging techniques for the diagnosis of breast cancer: a new role of prone scintimammography using technetium-99m sestamibi.Eur J Nucl Med 1994; 21: 357–362.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Anderson I, Aspergen K, Janzow L, Landberg T, Lidholm K, Linell F, Ljungberg O, Ranstam J, Sigfusson B. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmö Mammographic Screening Trial.Br Med J 1988; 297: 943–948.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emilio Bombardieri
    • 1
  • Flavio Crippa
    • 1
  • Lorenzo Maffioli
    • 1
  • Marco Greco
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Nuclear MedicineIstituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei TumoriMilanoItaly
  2. 2.Divison of Surgical Oncology “B”Istituto Nazionale per lo Studio e la Cura dei TumoriMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations