Annals of Nuclear Medicine

, Volume 21, Issue 8, pp 429–437

Predictive value of bone marrow accumulation of Tc-99m tetrofosmin for subsequent development of distant metastases in breast cancer

  • Shigetoshi Wakasugi
  • Hideaki Tsukuma
  • Hideo Inaji
  • Terumi Hashizume
  • Atsushi Noguchi
  • Takeshi Ohnishi
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 42 Downloads

Abstract

Objective

We evaluated the predictive value of bone marrow accumulation of technetium (Tc)-99m tetrofosmin in patients with breast cancer for distant metastases in comparison with conventional prognostic factors such as clinical stage, tumor size, axillary lymph node (Node) status, and estrogen receptor (ER) status.

Methods

Bone marrow scans with Tc-99m tetrofosmin were performed on 64 patients with breast cancer who had no clinical evidence of distant metastases. Accumulation in the femoral marrow was classified into four patterns, no detectable, lower, higher, and intensively higher. Higher or intensively higher pattern was interpreted as abnormal. Thirty-six patients with abnormal accumulation (marrow-positive group) and 28 patients without abnormal accumulation (marrow-negative group) were enrolled in the follow-up study. The mean length of observation after scans was approximately 3 years. The predictive value of femoral marrow status and conventional prognostic factors for distant metastases was evaluated by statistical analysis.

Results

Univariate analysis showed a significantly higher incidence of subsequent bone metastases (36% > 4%; P < 0.005), and distant metastases (69% > 18%; P < 0.001) in the marrow-positive group when compared with the marrow-negative group. Conventional prognostic factors except tumor size were also significantly associated with the development of distant metastases; 77% in clinical stage 3 > 39% in clinical stages 1, 2, P < 0.05; 64% in Node-positive >29% in Node-negative, P < 0.01; and 70% in ER negative >27% in ER positive, P < 0.005. These conventional factors were not significantly associated with bone metastases. The Cox proportional hazard ratio for bone metastases was markedly higher in femoral marrow status (hazard ratio = 11.07). The distant metastases-free survival was significantly reduced in ER negative (P < 0.0005), Node-positive (P = 0.0215), and clinical stage 3 patients (P = 0.0163). On the other hand, a more marked difference was observed in the femoral marrow status (P < 0.0001). The hazard ratio for distant metastases was 2.44 in clinical stage, 2.74 in tumor size, 2.74 in Node, and 3.68 in ER, which were each independent prognostic factors associated with distant metastases. However, femoral marrow status was markedly associated with distant metastases (hazard ratio = 5.27).

Conclusions

Bone marrow accumulation of Tc-99m tetrofosmin can be a promising prognostic factor independent of conventional prognostic factors for predicting development of not only bone metastases but also distant metastases in breast cancer.

Key words

Breast cancer Prediction of distant metastases Occult metastases in femoral marrow Tc-99m tetrofosmin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Diel, IJ 2001Bone marrow staging for breast cancer: is it better than axillary node dissection?Semin Oncol2823644PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jauch, KW, Heiss, NM, Gruetzner, U 1996Prognostic significance of bone marrow micrometastases inpatients with gastric cancerJ Clin Oncol1418107PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lindemann, F, Schlimok, G, Dirschedl, P 1992Prognostic significance of micrometastatic tumor cells in bone marrow of colorectal cancer patientsLancet3406859PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pantel, K, Izbicki, J, Passlick, B 1996Frequency and prognostic significance of isolated tumor cells in bone marrow of patients with non-small cell lung cancer without overt metastasesLancet34764953PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braun, S, Pantel, K, Muller, P 2000Cytokeratin-positive cells in the bone marrow and survival of patients with stage 1, 2, or 3 breast cancerN Engl J Med34252533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hepp, F, Kentenich, C, Janni, W 2000Hematogeneous micrometastases detected in bone marrow of patients with stage FIGO 1–2 carcinoma of the uterine cervix predicts poor prognosisProc Am Assoc Cancer Res41248893Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Janni, WJ, Hepp, F, Kentenich, C 2000Prognostic significance of disseminated tumor cells in bone marrow of patients with primarily diagnosed ovarian cancer (Abstract 1517)Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol19383aGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wakasugi, S, Noguchi, A, Katuda, T 2002Potential of 99mTc-MIBI for detecting bone marrow metastasesJ Nucl Med43596602PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wakasugi, S, Ohta, K, Hasegawa, Y 2001Detection of minimal residual disease in acute leukemia by 99mTc-MIBI femoral marrow imagingClin Nucl Med2632530PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sobin, LH, Fleming, ID 1997TNM classification of malignant tumors, fifth edition (1997). Union Internationale Contre le Cancer and the American Joint Committee on CancerCancer8018034PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Janni, W, Rjosk, D, Braun, S 2000Clinical relevance of occult metastatic cells in the bone marrow of patients with different stages of breast cancerClin Breast Cancer121725PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    DeVita, VT,Jr 1989Breast cancer therapy: exercising all our opinionsN Engl J Med3205279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Overgaard, M, Hansen, PS, Overgaad, J 1997Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant chemotherapyN Engl J Med33794955PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ragaz, J, Jackson, SM, Le, N 1997Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy in node-positive premenopausal women with breast cancerN Engl J Med33795662PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Menard, S, Bufalino, R, Rilke, F, Cascinelli, N, Veronesi, U, Colnaghi, MI 1994Prognosis based on primary breast carcinoma instead of pathological nodal statusBr J Cancer7070912PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pantel, K, Brakenhoff, RH 2004Dissecting the metastatic cascadeNat Rev Cancer444856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Braun, S, Vogl, FD, Naume, B, Janni, W, Osborne, MP, Coombes, C,  et al. 2005A pooled analysis of bone marrow micrometastasis in breast cancerN Engl J Med353793802PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mansi, JL, Berger, U, Mcdonnell, T 1989The fate of bone marrow micrometastases in patients with primary breast cancerJ Clin Oncol74459PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harbeck, N, Untch, M, Pache, L 1994Tumor cell detection in the bone marrow of breast cancer patients at primary therapy: results of a 3-year median follow-upBr J Cancer6956671PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gebauer, G, Fehm, T, Merkle, E 2001Epithelial cells in bone marrow of breast cancer patients at time of primary surgery: clinical outcome during long-term follow-upJ Clin Oncol19366974PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mileshkin, L, Blum, R, Seymour, JF 2004A comparison of fluorine-18 fluoro-deoxyglucose PET and technetium-99m sestamibi in assessing patients with multiple myelomaEur J Haematol72327PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Janni, W, Gastroph, S, Hepp, F 2000Prognostic significance of an increased number of micrometastatic tumor cells in the bone marrow of patients with first recurrence of breast carcinomaCancer8822529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pantel, K, von Knebel Doeberitz, M, Izbicki, JR 1997Disseminated tumor cells: diagnosis, prognostic relevance, phenotyping and therapeutic strategiesChirurg68124150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Abdel-Dayem, HM, Sanchez, J, Al-Mohannadi, S 1992Diffuse thallium-201-chloride uptake in hypermetabolic bone marrow following treatment with granulocyte stimulating factorJ Nucl Med3320148PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fletcher, BD, Wall, JE, Hanna, SL 1993Effect of hematopoietic growth factors on MR images of bone marrow in children undergoing chemotherapyRadiology18974550PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sugawara, Y, Fisher, SJ, Zasadny, KR 1998Preclinical and clinical studies of bone marrow uptake of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose with or without granulocyte colony-stimulating factor during chemotherapyJ Clin Oncol161738PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yao, WJ, Hoh, CK, Hawkins, RA 1995Quantitative PET imaging of bone marrow glucose metabolic response to hematopoietic cytokinesJ Nucl Med36794800PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shigetoshi Wakasugi
    • 1
  • Hideaki Tsukuma
    • 2
  • Hideo Inaji
    • 3
  • Terumi Hashizume
    • 1
  • Atsushi Noguchi
    • 1
  • Takeshi Ohnishi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear MedicineOsaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular DiseasesOsakaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Cancer Control and StatisticsOsaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular DiseasesOsakaJapan
  3. 3.Department of Breast SurgeryOsaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular DiseasesOsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations