Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Performance of 2-Deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-d-glucose Positron Emission Tomography and Integrated PET/CT in Restaged Breast Cancer Patients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Molecular Imaging and Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study was conducted to compare the clinical stage derived from 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) to that of integrated PET/computed tomography (CT) in restaged breast cancer patients.

Procedures

Fifty-eight female patients (age range 29–80 years, mean age ±SD, 53.3 ± 11.7 years) underwent PET/CT restaging for breast cancer. Two experienced nuclear medicine physicians interpreted PET images. A radiologist was added for reading PET/CT studies. A patient-based analysis was performed. Histopathological findings, correlative imaging studies, changes in number, size, and hypermetabolic activity of suspicious lesions and/or patient outcome served as standard of reference for determining the diagnostic accuracy of both modalities.

Results

PET staged 79.3% (46/58) of the patients correctly, overstaged seven (12.1%), and understaged five patients (8.6%). Integrated PET/CT staged 89.7% (52/58) of the patients correctly, overstaged four (6.9%), and understaged two patients (3.4%). The staging accuracy of PET/CT was not significantly better than that of PET alone (p = 0.059). Lesions exhibiting mild hypermetabolic activity, benign inflammatory lesions, and physiological variants largely explained incorrect PET findings.

Conclusion

Integrated PET/CT only marginally improves the restaging accuracy over PET alone (p = 0.059) in breast cancer patients.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Moon DH, Maddahi J, Silverman DH, Glaspy JA, Phelps ME, Hoh CK (1998) Accuracy of whole-body fluorine-18-FDG PET for the detection of recurrent or metastatic breast carcinoma. J Nucl Med (USA) 39:431–435

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Scheidhauer K, Scharl A, Pietrzyk U, Wagner R, Gohring UJ, Schomacker K, Schicha H (1996) Qualitative [18F]FDG positron emission tomography in primary breast cancer: Clinical relevance and practicability. Eur J Nucl Med (Germany) 23:618–623

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hoh CK, Schiepers C (1999) 18-FDG imaging in breast cancer. Semin Nucl Med (USA) 29:49–56

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Vranjesevic D, Filmont JE, Meta J, Silverman DH, Phelps ME, Rao J, Valk PE, Czernin J (2002) Whole-body (18)F-FDG PET and conventional imaging for predicting outcome in previously treated breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med (USA) 43:325–329

    Google Scholar 

  5. Avril N, Menzel M, Dose J, Schelling M, Weber W, Janicke F, Nathrath W, Schwaiger M (2001) Glucose metabolism of breast cancer assessed by 18F-FDG PET: Histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis. J Nucl Med (USA) 42:9–16

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. McDonough MD, DePeri ER, Mincey BA (2004) The role of positron emission tomographic imaging in breast cancer. Curr Oncol Rep (USA) 6:62–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wahl RL, Siegel BA, Coleman RE, Gatsonis CG (2004) 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 (USA) 22:277–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. van der Hoeven JJ, Hoekstra OS, Comans EF, Pijpers R, Boom RP, van Geldere D, Meijer S, Lammertsma AA, Teule GJ (2002) Determinants of diagnostic performance of [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for axillary staging in breast cancer. Ann Surg (USA) 236:619–624

    Google Scholar 

  9. Zornoza G, Garcia-Velloso MJ, Sola J, Regueira FM, Pina L, Beorlegui C (2004) 18F-FDG PET complemented with sentinel lymph node biopsy in the detection of axillary involvement in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol (USA) 30:15–19

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B, von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC (2003) Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med (USA) 348:2500–2507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Halpern BS, Dahlbom M, Quon A, Schiepers C, Waldherr C, Silverman DH, Ratib O, Czernin J (2004) Impact of patient weight and emission scan duration on PET/CT image quality and lesion detectability. J Nucl Med (USA) 45(5):797–801

    Google Scholar 

  14. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, Kinahan PE, Charron M, Roddy R, Jerin J, Young J, Byars L, Nutt R (2000) A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med (USA) 41:1369–1379

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, Beyer T, Sashin D (1998) Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. Med Phys (USA) 25:2046–2053

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hernandez CJ, Majeska RJ, Schaffler MB (2004) Osteocyte density in woven bone. Bone (USA) 35:1095–1099

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Cohade C, Mourtzikos KA, Wahl RL (2003) “USA-Fat”: Prevalence is related to ambient outdoor temperature—evaluation with 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med (USA) 44:1267–1270

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hany TF, Gharehpapagh E, Kamel EM, Buck A, Himms-Hagen J, von Schulthess GK (2002) Brown adipose tissue: A factor to consider in symmetrical tracer uptake in the neck and upper chest region. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (Germany) 29:1393–1398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yeung HW, Grewal RK, Gonen M, Schoder H, Larson SM (2003) Patterns of (18)F-FDG uptake in adipose tissue and muscle: A potential source of false-positives for PET. J Nucl Med (USA) 44:1789–1796

    Google Scholar 

  20. Shreve PD, Anzai Y, Wahl RL (1999) Pitfalls in oncologic diagnosis with FDG PET imaging: Physiologic and benign variants. Radiographics (USA) 19:61–77; quiz 150–151

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Engel H, Steinert H, Buck A, Berthold T, Huch Boni RA, von Schulthess GK (1996) Whole-body PET: Physiological and artifactual fluorodeoxyglucose accumulations. J Nucl Med (USA) 37:441–446

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vesselle HJ, Miraldi FD (1998) FDG PET of the retroperitoneum: Normal anatomy, variants, pathologic conditions, and strategies to avoid diagnostic pitfalls. Radiographics (USA) 18:805–823; discussion 823–804

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Lind P, Igerc I, Beyer T, Reinprecht P, Hausegger K (2004) Advantages and limitations of FDG PET in the follow-up of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (Germany) 31(Suppl 1):S125–S134

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gallowitsch HJ, Kresnik E, Gasser J, Kumnig G, Igerc I, Mikosch P, Lind P (2003) F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission 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 (USA) 38:250–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Buck A, Schirrmeister H, Kuhn T, Shen C, Kalker T, Kotzerke J, Dankerl A, Glatting G, Reske S, Mattfeldt T (2002) FDG uptake in breast cancer: Correlation with biological and clinical prognostic parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (Germany) 29:1317–1323

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Barry WF Jr, Wells SA Jr, Cox CE, Haagensen DE Jr (1981) Clinical and radiographic correlations in breast cancer patients with osseous metastases. Skelet Radiol (Germany) 6:27–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Coleman RE, Seaman JJ (2001) The role of zoledronic acid in cancer: Clinical studies in the treatment and prevention of bone metastases. Semin Oncol (USA) 28:11–16

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wahl RL, Cody RL, Hutchins GD, Mudgett EE (1991) Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: Initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabeled glucose analogue 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose. Radiology (USA) 179:765–770

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Redmond J III, Spring DB, Munderloh SH, George CB, Mansour RP, Volk SA (1984) Spinal computed tomography scanning in the evaluation of metastatic disease. Cancer (USA) 54:253–258

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rosenthal DI (1997) Radiologic diagnosis of bone metastases. Cancer (USA) 80:1595–1607

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, Dose J, Kuhn W, Bense S, Weber W, Ziegler S, Graeff H, Schwaiger M (2000) Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: Use and limitations. J Clin Oncol (USA) 18:3495–3502

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

Barbara Fueger has been funded by the Austrian Science Fund through an Erwin Schroedinger Scholarship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology, Ahmanson Biological Imaging Center, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-6942, USA

    Barbara J. Fueger MD, Wolfgang A. Weber MD, Andrew Quon MD, M. S. Allen-Auerbach MD, B. S. Halpern MD, Michael E. Phelps PhD & Johannes Czernin MD

  2. Department of Radiological Sciences, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1721, USA

    Tyler L. Crawford MD & Osman Ratib MD

Authors
  1. Barbara J. Fueger MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wolfgang A. Weber MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew Quon MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tyler L. Crawford MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. S. Allen-Auerbach MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. B. S. Halpern MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Osman Ratib MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Michael E. Phelps PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Johannes Czernin MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johannes Czernin MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fueger, B.J., Weber, W.A., Quon, A. et al. Performance of 2-Deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-d-glucose Positron Emission Tomography and Integrated PET/CT in Restaged Breast Cancer Patients. Mol Imaging Biol 7, 369–376 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-005-0013-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-005-0013-4

Key words

Search

Navigation