Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Advanced breast cancer: new imaging techniques for detection of metastases

  • short review
  • Published:
memo - Magazine of European Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Whole-body imaging modalities such as [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)—positron emission tomography (PET)/CT or whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) appear as new promising tools to detect tumor recurrence or distant metastases. Both techniques expect to have some impact on patient management. In order to detect bone metastases, [18F]fluoride-PET/CT and SPECT/CT are further new imaging tools. This review article provides an overview over the accuracy of these imaging techniques in staging of breast cancer.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pennant M, Takwoingi Y, Pennant L, et al. A systematic review of positron emission tomography (PET) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the diagnosis of breast cancer recurrence. Health Technol Assess. 2010;14:1–103.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Anonymous. Impact of follow-up testing on survival and health-related quality of life in breast cancer patients. A multicenter randomized controlled trial. The GIVIO Investigators. JAMA. 1994;271:1587–92.

  3. Palli D, Russo A, Saieva C, et al. Intensive vs clinical follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer: 10-year update of a randomized trial. National Research Council project on breast cancer follow-up. JAMA. 1999;281:1586.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rosselli Del Turco M, Palli D, Cariddi A, Ciatto S, Pacini P, Distante V. Intensive diagnostic follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer. A randomized trial. National Research Council project on breast cancer follow-up. JAMA. 1994;271:1593–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rojas MP, Telaro E, Russo A, Moschetti I, Coe L, Fossati R, et al. Follow-up strategies for women treated for early breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jan 25;(1):CD001768 (Review).

  6. Piperkova E, Raphael B, Altinyay ME, et al. Impact of PET/CT in comparison with same day contrast enhanced CT in breast cancer management. Clin Nucl Med. 2007;32:429–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Veit-Haibach P, Antoch G, Beyer T, et al. FDG-PET/CT in restaging of patients with recurrent breast cancer: possible impact on staging and therapy. Br J Radiol. 2007;80:508–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Costelloe CM, Rohren EM, Madewell JE, et al. Imaging bone metastases in breast cancer: techniques and recommendations for diagnosis. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:606–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ohta M, Tokuda Y, Suzuki Y, 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  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ, Kao CH, Lin CC, Lee CC. Comparing whole body (18) F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99 m methylene diphosphonate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2002;128:325–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu T, Cheng T, Xu W, Yan WL, Liu J, Yang HL. A meta-analysis of 18FDG-PET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40:523–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 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 

  13. 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;16:3375–79.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, et al. Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:1266–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T, 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 

  16. Hahn S, Heusner T, Kummel S, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and bone scintigraphy for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. Acta Radiol. 2011;52:1009–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ben-Haim S, Israel O. Breast cancer: role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med. 2009;39:408–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Flusser G, et al. Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: initial experience with 18 F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18 F-fluoride PET and 18 F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:272–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Kotzerke J, et al. Early detection and accurate description of extent of metastatic bone disease in breast cancer with fluoride ion and positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:2381–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sharma P, Singh H, Kumar R, et al. Bone scintigraphy in breast cancer: added value of hybrid SPECT-CT and its impact on patient management. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:139–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Eustace S, Tello R, DeCarvalho V, et al. A comparison of whole-body turboSTIR MR imaging and planar 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate scintigraphy in the examination of patients with suspected skeletal metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1655–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Steinborn MM, Heuck AF, Tiling R, Bruegel M, Gauger L, Reiser MF. Whole-body bone marrow MRI in patients with metastatic disease to the skeletal system. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1999;23:123–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Horvath LJ, Burtness BA, McCarthy S, Johnson KM. Total-body echo-planar MR imaging in the staging of breast cancer: comparison with conventional methods—early experience. Radiology. 1999;211:119–28.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Walker R, Kessar P, Blanchard R, et al. Turbo STIR magnetic resonance imaging as a whole-body screening tool for metastases in patients with breast carcinoma: preliminary clinical experience. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;11:343–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Tamada T, Nagai K, Iizuka M, et al. Comparison of whole-body MR imaging and bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases from breast cancer. Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi. 2000;60:249–54.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU, et al. Whole-body MR imaging: evaluation of patients for metastases. Radiology. 2004;233:139–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Engelhard K, Hollenbach HP, Wohlfart K, von Imhoff E, Fellner FA. Comparison of whole-body MRI with automatic moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol. 2004;14;99–105.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gutzeit A, Doert A, Froehlich JM, et al. Comparison of diffusion-weighted whole body MRI and skeletal scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate or breast carcinoma. Skeletal Radiol. 2010;39:333–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schmidt GP, Schoenberg SO, Schmid R, et al. Screening for bone metastases: whole-body MRI using a 32-channel system versus dual-modality PET-CT. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:939–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, et al. Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA. 2003;290;3199–3206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schmidt GP, Baur-Melnyk A, Haug A, et al. Comprehensive imaging of tumor recurrence in breast cancer patients using whole-body MRI at 1.5 and 3 T compared to FDG-PET-CT. Eur J Radiol. 2008;65:47–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Niikura N, Liu J, Costelloe CM, et al. Initial staging impact of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in locally advanced breast cancer. Oncologist. 2011;16:772–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Division of General Radiological Diagnostics, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria

    Helmut Schoellnast MD

  2. Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 9, 8036, Graz, Austria

    Christian Gstettner MD

Authors
  1. Helmut Schoellnast MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Gstettner MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helmut Schoellnast MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schoellnast, H., Gstettner, C. Advanced breast cancer: new imaging techniques for detection of metastases. memo 5, 129–133 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12254-012-0008-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12254-012-0008-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation