Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

FDG-avid sclerotic bone metastases in breast cancer patients: a PET/CT case series

  • Case report
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Distant metastases from breast cancer most frequently occur in the skeleton. Although 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), with or without computed tomography (CT), is superior to bone scintigraphy for the detection of osteolytic bone metastases, it has been reported that sclerotic bone metastases frequently show no or only a low degree of FDG uptake on PET and PET/CT. Since both lytic and sclerotic metastases can occur in breast cancer patients, bone scintigraphy may remain of additional value in these patients. In this case series, we describe four breast cancer patients in whom FDG PET/CT has clearly visualized sclerotic bone metastases because of increased FDG uptake. Not so much the type of metastasis (sclerotic or lytic), but possibly the characteristics of the primary tumor or treatments prior to the FDG PET/CT scan might influence the degree of FDG uptake of bone metastases. The ability to detect sclerotic bone metastases based on increased FDG uptake supports the use of FDG PET/CT as a staging procedure in breast cancer patients, but knowledge of factors determining the visibility of bone metastases with FDG PET/CT is crucial.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. van der Hoeven JJM, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, Comans EFI, Boom RPA, van Geldere D, et al. 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in staging of locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1253–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mahner S, Schirrmacher S, Brenner W, Jenicke L, Habermann CR, Avril N, et al. Comparison between positron emission tomography using 2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose, conventional imaging and computed tomography for staging of breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:1249–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Fuster D, Duch J, Paredes P, Velasco M, Muñoz M, Santamaría G, et al. Preoperative staging of large primary breast cancer with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography compared with conventional imaging procedures. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4746–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hodgson NC, Gulenchyn KY. Is there a role for positron emission tomography in breast cancer staging? J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:712–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480–508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kennecke H, Yerushalmi R, Woods R, Cheang MCU, Voduc D, Speers CH, et al. Metastatic behavior of breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3271–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kasem AR, Desai A, Daniell S, Sinha P. Bone scan and liver ultrasound scan in the preoperative staging for primary breast cancer. Breast J. 2006;12:544–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ, Kao CH, Lin CC, Lee CC. 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. 2002;128:325–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:3375–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Abe K, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Koga H, Baba S, Hayashi K, et al. Comparison of 18FDG-PET with 99mTc-HMDP scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2005;19:573–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T, Yamada K, Ushijima Y, Taniike K, et al. Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1253–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Du Y, Cullum I, Illidge TM, Ell PJ. Fusion of metabolic function and morphology: sequential [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography studies yield new insights into the natural history of bone metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3440–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fogelman I. Osteoblastic bone metastases in breast cancer: is not seeing believing? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1250–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Moretti J-L, Porcher R, Espié M, Lehmann-Che J, et al. Correlation of high 18F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:426–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gil-Rendo A, Martínez-Regueira F, Zornoza G, García-Velloso MJ, Beorlegui C, Rodriguez-Spiteri N. Association between [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and prognostic parameters in breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2009;96:166–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Shie P, Cardarelli R, Brandon D, Erdman W, Abdulrahim N. Meta-analysis: comparison of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2008;33:97–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Morris PG, Lynch C, Feeney JN, Patil S, Howard J, Larson SM, et al. Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3154–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hall FM. Imaging bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:1082. author reply 1082–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ohta M, Tokuda Y, Suzuki Y, Kubota M, Makuuchi H, Tajima T, et al. Whole body PET for the evaluation of bony metastases in patients with breast cancer: comparison with 99Tcm-MDP bone scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22:875–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Israel O, Goldberg A, Nachtigal A, Militianu D, Bar-Shalom R, Keidar Z, et al. FDG-PET and CT patterns of bone metastases and their relationship to previously administered anti-cancer therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:1280–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Segaert I, Mottaghy F, Ceyssens S, De Wever W, Stroobants S, Van Ongeval C, et al. Additional value of PET-CT in staging of clinical stage IIB and III breast cancer. Breast J. 2010;16:617–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

No fundings, grants or technical support were received for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Bas B. Koolen, Erik Vegt, Wouter V. Vogel, Marcel P. M. Stokkel, Cornelis A. Hoefnagel & Renato A. Valdés Olmos

  2. Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Bas B. Koolen, Emiel J. Th. Rutgers & Marie-Jeanne T. F. D. Vrancken Peeters

  3. Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Annemarie Fioole-Bruining

  4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, PO Box 90203, 1006 BE, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Bas B. Koolen

Authors
  1. Bas B. Koolen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erik Vegt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emiel J. Th. Rutgers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wouter V. Vogel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marcel P. M. Stokkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Cornelis A. Hoefnagel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Annemarie Fioole-Bruining
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Marie-Jeanne T. F. D. Vrancken Peeters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Renato A. Valdés Olmos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bas B. Koolen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Koolen, B.B., Vegt, E., Rutgers, E.J.T. et al. FDG-avid sclerotic bone metastases in breast cancer patients: a PET/CT case series. Ann Nucl Med 26, 86–91 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-011-0538-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-011-0538-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation