Correlation of breast cancer subtypes, based on estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2, with functional imaging parameters from 68Ga-RGD PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT
- 1.1k Downloads
Imaging biomarkers from functional imaging modalities were assessed as potential surrogate markers of disease status. Specifically, in this prospective study, we investigated the relationships between functional imaging parameters and histological prognostic factors and breast cancer subtypes.
In total, 43 patients with large or locally advanced invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) were analyzed (47.6 ± 7.5 years old). 68Ga-Labeled arginine-glycine-aspartic acid (RGD) and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) were performed. The maximum and average standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVavg) from RGD PET/CT and SUVmax and SUVavg from FDG PET/CT were the imaging parameters used. For histological prognostic factors, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression was identified using immunohistochemistry (IHC) or fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). Four breast cancer subtypes, based on ER/PR and HER2 expression (ER/PR+,Her2−, ER/PR+,Her2+, ER/PR−,Her2+, and ER/PR−,Her2−), were considered.
Quantitative FDG PET parameters were significantly higher in the ER-negative group (15.88 ± 8.73 vs 10.48 ± 6.01, p = 0.02 for SUVmax; 9.40 ± 5.19 vs 5.92 ± 4.09, p = 0.02 for SUVavg) and the PR-negative group (8.37 ± 4.94 vs 4.79 ± 3.93, p = 0.03 for SUVavg). Quantitative RGD PET parameters were significantly higher in the HER2-positive group (2.42 ± 0.59 vs 2.90 ± 0.75, p = 0.04 for SUVmax; 1.60 ± 0.38 vs 1.95 ± 0.53, p = 0.04 for SUVavg) and showed a significant positive correlation with the HER2/CEP17 ratio (r = 0.38, p = 0.03 for SUVmax and r = 0.46, p < 0.01 for SUVavg). FDG PET parameters showed significantly higher values in the ER/PR−,Her2− subgroup versus the ER/PR+,Her2− or ER/PR+,Her2+ subgroups, while RGD PET parameters showed significantly lower values in the ER/PR−,Her2− subgroup versus the other subgroups. There was no correlation between FDG and RGD PET parameters in the overall group. Only the ER/PR−,Her2− subgroup showed a significant positive correlation between FDG and RGD PET parameters (r = 0.59, p = 0.03 for SUVmax).
68Ga-RGD and 18F-FDG PET/CT are promising functional imaging modalities for predicting biomarkers and molecular phenotypes in breast cancer patients.
KeywordsArginine-glycine-aspartic acid (RGD) Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) Positron emission tomography (PET) Estrogen receptor (ER) Progesterone receptor (PR) Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)
This study was supported by a grant of the Korea Healthcare Technology R&D Project, Ministry for Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (A070001 and A100716).
Conflicts of interest
- 3.Nguyen PL, Taghian AG, Katz MS, Niemierko A, Abi Raad RF, Boon WL, et al. Breast cancer subtype approximated by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2 is associated with local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2373–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Chen W, Delaloye S, Silverman DHS, Geist C, Czernin J, Sayre J, et al. Predicting treatment response of malignant gliomas to bevacizumab and irinotecan by imaging proliferation with [18F] fluorothymidine positron emission tomography: a pilot study. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:4714–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Petit A, Rak J, Hung MC, Rockwell P, Goldstein N, Fendly B, et al. Neutralizing antibodies against epidermal growth factor and ErbB-2/neu receptor tyrosine kinases down-regulate vascular endothelial growth factor production by tumor cells in vitro and in vivo: angiogenic implications for signal transduction therapy of solid tumors. Am J Pathol 1997;151:1523–30.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.Ellis C, Dyson M, Stephenson T, Maltby E. HER2 amplification status in breast cancer: a comparison between immunohistochemical staining and fluorescence in situ hybridisation using manual and automated quantitative image analysis scoring techniques. J Clin Pathol 2005;58:710–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Ueda S, Tsuda H, Asakawa H, Shigekawa T, Fukatsu K, Kondo N, et al. 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 2008;38:250–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Koolen B, Vrancken Peeters MJ, Wesseling J, Lips E, Vogel W, Aukema T, et al. Association of primary tumour FDG uptake with clinical, histopathological and molecular characteristics in breast cancer patients scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39:1830–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar