Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Discrepancy between [18F]-FES and [18F]-FDG PET/CT in ER-positive breast cancer with oesophageal metastasis

  • Image of the Month
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Data availability

Contact the corresponding author for data requests.

References

  1. Su H, Wu J, Liu H, Wei N, Lin W, Zhou Q, Wang M, Lv S, Yang Y. Review of esophageal metastasis from breast cancer. Gland Surg. 2020;9:417–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Research C for DE and. Drug Trial Snapshot: CERIANNA. FDA [Internet]. FDA. 2020. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-approvals-and-databases/drug-trial-snapshot-cerianna. Accessed 8 Jul 2021.

  3. Gupta M, Datta A, Choudhury PS, Dsouza M, Batra U, Mishra A. Can 18F-fluoroestradiol positron emission tomography become a new imaging standard in the estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patient: a prospective comparative study with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography? World J Nucl Med. 2017;16:133–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chae SY, Ahn SH, Kim SB, Han S, Lee SH, Oh SJ, Lee SJ, Kim HJ, Ko BS, Lee JW, Son BH, Kim J, Ahn JH, Jung KH, Kim JE, Kim SY, Choi WJ, Shin HJ, Gong G, Lee HS, Lee JB, Moon DH. Diagnostic accuracy and safety of 16α-[18F]fluoro-17β-oestradiol PET-CT for the assessment of oestrogen receptor status in recurrent or metastatic lesions in patients with breast cancer: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:546–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chae SY, Son HJ, Lee DY, Shin E, Oh JS, Seo SY, Baek S, Kim JY, Na SJ, Moon DH. Comparison of diagnostic sensitivity of [18F]fluoroestradiol and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for breast cancer recurrence in patients with a history of estrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer. EJNMMI Res. 2020;10:54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fujii T, Yajima R, Kurozumi S, Higuchi T, Obayashi S, Tokiniwa H, Nagaoka R, Takata D, Horiguchi J, Kuwano H. Clinical significance of 18F-FDG-PET in invasive lobular carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 2016;36:5481–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Xin L, Eng L. A review of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: should it be treated like invasive ductal carcinoma? Integr Cancer Sci Therap [Internet]. 2016;3. https://oatext.com/A-review-of-invasive-lobular-carcinoma-of-the-breast-Should-it-be-treated-like-invasive-ductal-carcinoma.php. Accessed 7 Feb 2022.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank H. Nikki March, PhD, from Edanz (https://www.edanz.com/ac) for editing a draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Cyclotron and PET Centre, Chulabhorn Hospital, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand

    Peerapon Kiatkittikul, Chetsadaporn Promteangtrong, Anchisa Kunawudhi, Dheeratama Siripongsatian & Chanisa Chotipanich

Authors
  1. Peerapon Kiatkittikul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chetsadaporn Promteangtrong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anchisa Kunawudhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dheeratama Siripongsatian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chanisa Chotipanich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Peerapon Kiatkittikul. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Peerapon Kiatkittikul and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peerapon Kiatkittikul.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Chulabhorn Research Institute in accordance with the Helsinki declaration.

Consent for publication

All participants have consented to the submission of this case report to the journal.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Oncology – General.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kiatkittikul, P., Promteangtrong, C., Kunawudhi, A. et al. Discrepancy between [18F]-FES and [18F]-FDG PET/CT in ER-positive breast cancer with oesophageal metastasis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49, 3297–3298 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05759-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05759-z

Search

Navigation