Combined use of 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI for response monitoring of breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy
- 810 Downloads
To explore the potential complementary value of PET/CT and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in predicting pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) of breast cancer and the dependency on breast cancer subtype.
We performed 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI examinations before and during NAC. The imaging features evaluated on both examinations included baseline and changes in 18F-FDG maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) on PET/CT, and tumour morphology and contrast uptake kinetics on MRI. The outcome measure was a (near) pathological complete response ((near-)pCR) after surgery. Receiver operating characteristic curves with area under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the relationships between patient, tumour and imaging characteristics and tumour responses.
Of 93 patients, 43 achieved a (near-)pCR. The responses varied among the different breast cancer subtypes. On univariate analysis the following variables were significantly associated with (near-)pCR: age (p = 0.033), breast cancer subtype (p < 0.001), relative change in SUVmax on PET/CT (p < 0.001) and relative change in largest tumour diameter on MRI (p < 0.001). The AUC for the relative reduction in SUVmax on PET/CT was 0.78 (95 % CI 0.68–0.88), and for the relative reduction in tumour diameter at late enhancement on MRI was 0.79 (95 % CI 0.70–0.89). The AUC increased to 0.90 (95 % CI 0.83–0.96) in the final multivariate model with PET/CT, MRI and breast cancer subtype combined (p = 0.012).
PET/CT and MRI showed comparable value for monitoring response during NAC. Combined use of PET/CT and MRI had complementary potential. Research with more patients is required to further elucidate the dependency on breast cancer subtype.
KeywordsBreast cancer Neoadjuvant chemotherapy Positron emission tomography Magnetic resonance imaging Response monitoring
The authors thank Anita Paape, Inge Kemper, Marjo Holtkamp, Margaret Schot, and Jacqueline van Zyll de Jong for their contribution to this study.
Conflicts of interest
This study was performed within the framework of CTMM, the Center for Translational Molecular Medicine (www.ctmm.nl), project Breast CARE (grant 03O-104).
- 4.Esserman LJ, Berry DA, Cheang MC, Yau C, Perou CM, Carey L, et al. Chemotherapy response and recurrence-free survival in neoadjuvant breast cancer depends on biomarker profiles: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL (CALGB 150007/150012; ACRIN 6657). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;132:1049–62.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.EUSOMA – European Society of Breast Cancer Specialists. http://www.eusoma.org. Accessed 13 Apr 2014.
- 28.Partridge SC, Vanantwerp RK, Doot RK, Chai X, Kurland BF, Eby PR, et al. Association between serial dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and dynamic 18F-FDG PET measures in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;32:1124–31.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Dose-Schwarz J, Tiling R, Avril-Sassen S, Mahner S, Lebeau A, Weber C, et al. Assessment of residual tumour by FDG-PET: conventional imaging and clinical examination following primary chemotherapy of large and locally advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2010;102:35–41.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Fangberget A, Nilsen LB, Hole KH, Holmen MM, Engebraaten O, Naume B, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer-response evaluation and prediction of response to treatment using dynamic contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:1188–99.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar