Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Molecular imaging in metastatic breast cancer

  • Chapter
Metastasis of Breast Cancer

Part of the book series: Cancer Metastasis – Biology and Treatment ((CMBT,volume 11))

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common cause of cancer death among women worldwide. Therapeutic decisions in breast cancer are based on stage and specific tumour characteristics. In addition to conventional imaging and histopathological evaluation, potentially non-invasive molecular imaging of tumour metabolism (by means of the [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography, FDG-PET) and known predictive biosensitivity, markers (oestrogen-and progesterone receptor, HER2) can be used for disease evaluation in the future. Molecular imaging provides a functional, dynamic aspect that might be useful for diagnostic purposes, treatment selection, and for monitoring treatment response at a molecular level. This is of particular interest in view of the dynamics of tumour metabolism and biomarker expression during progression and treatment of breast cancer. For staging of recurrent and metastatic breast cancer, FDG-PET imaging of tumour metabolism can be of value in selected cases, with its high sensitivity, but varying specificity. For response monitoring and prognostic evaluation, FDG-PET may be useful, but future studies are required to confirm this. Molecular imaging of tumour HER2 and the oestrogen receptor was shown to be feasible in metastatic breast cancer. Imaging of these biomarkers may allow a more tumour specific detection than with FDG-PET or conventional imaging, but its use in breast cancer staging-or treatment requires further evaluation. Future options for molecular imaging in breast cancer include monitoring of other significant biomarkers (such as the progesterone receptor), or direct treatment evaluation by radiolabelling targeted therapeutic drugs (such as the antivascular endothelial growth factor antibody bevacizumab). To establish molecular imaging in practical (breast) cancer care, more extensive research is needed, but clearly the possibilities are extensive.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Clinical Practive Guidelines in Oncology V.2.2006, section Invasive Breast Cancer. www.nccn.org.

  2. PDQ: Cancer Information Summaries: Adult Treatment, National Cancer Institute. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/adulttreatment.

  3. DeVita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (editors). Cancer, principles and practice of oncology (7th ed.). Ch 33.2, 2005, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. 1454-1455.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barentz J, Takahaxhi S, Oyen W, Mus R, de Mulder P, Oudkerk M, Mali W. Commonly used imaging techniques for diagnosis and staging. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3234-3244.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Weber WA. Positron Emission Tomography as an imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3282-3292.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fan C, Oh DS, Wessels L, Weigelt B, Nuyten D, Nobel AB, van’t Veer L, Perou CM. Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 560-569.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. O’Shaughnessy JA. Molecular signatures predict outcomes of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 615-617.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zidan J, Dashkovsky I, Stayerman C, Basher W, Cozacov C, Hadary A. Comparison of HER-2 overexpression in primary breast cancer and metastatic sites and its effect on biological targeting therapy of metastatic disease. Br J Cancer. 2005; 93: 552-556.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Solomayer EF, Becker S, Pergola-Becker G, Bachmann R, Kramer B, Vogel U, Neubauer H, Wallwiener D, Huober J, Fehm TN. Comparison of HER2 status between primary tumor and disseminated tumor cells in primary breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006; 9: 179-184.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Chilcott F, Waikar S, Whitaker T, Ah-See AK, Eremin O, Heys SD, Gilbert FJ, Sharp PF. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 1676-1688.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dehdashti F, Flanagan FL, Mortimer JE, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ, Siegel BA. Positron emission tomographic assessment of “metabolic flare” to predict response of metastatic breast cancer to antiestrogen therapy. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999; 26: 51-56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. UpToDate®, Inc. founded by Burton D. Rose, MD Joseph M. Rush, MD. General principles of management of metastatic breast cancer. www.uptodate.com.

  13. Brix G, Henze M, Knopp MV, Lucht R, Doll J, Junkermann H, Hawighorst H, Haberkorn U. Comparison of pharmacokinetic MRI and [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the diagnosis of breast cancer: initial experience. Eur Radiol. 2001; 11: 2058-2070.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Crippa F, Seregni E, Agresti R, Chiesa C, Pascali C, Bogni A, Decise De Sanctis V, Greco M, Daidone MG, Bombardieri E. Association between [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and postoperative histopathology, hormone receptor status, thymidine labelling index and p53 in primary breast cancer: a preliminary observation. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998; 25: 1429-1434.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hicks RJ, Binns D, Stabin MG. Pattern of uptake and excretion of (18)F-FDG in the lactating breast. J Nucl Med. 2001; 42: 1238-1242.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bakheet SM, Powe J, Kandil A, Ezzat A, Rostom A, Amartey J. F-18 FDG uptake in breast infection and inflammation. Clin Nucl Med. 2000; 25:100-103.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Carr CE, Conant EF, Rosen MA, Schnall MD, Davidson R. Impact of FDG PET in the staging of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006 ASCO Annual meeting proceedings I; 24 (18S): 530.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Moon DH, Maddahi J, Silverman DH, Glaspy JA, Phelps ME, Hoh CK. Accuracy of whole-body fluorine-18-FDG-PET for the detection of recurrent or metastatic breat carcinoma. J Nucl med 1998; 39: 431-435.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Port ER, Yeung H, Gonen M, Liberman L, Caravelli J, Borgen P, Larson S. 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography scanning affects surgical management in selected patients with high-risk, operable breast carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13: 677-684.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Van der Hoeven JJ, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, Comans EF, Boom RP, van Geldere D, Meijer S, van der Wall E, Buter J, Pinedo HM, Teule GJ, Lammertsma AA. 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in staging of locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 1253-1259.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Minn H, Soini I. [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose scintigraphy in diagnosis and follow up of treatment in advanced breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med. 1989; 15: 61-66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Endo K, Oriuchi N, Higuchi T, Iida Y, Hanaoka H, Miyakubo M, Ishikita T, Koyama K. PET and PET/CT using 18F-FDG in the diagnosis and management of cancer patients. Int J Clin Oncol 2006; 11: 286-296.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rousseau C, Bodet-Milin C, Bennouna J, Ferrer L, Campion L, Bridji B, Sagan C, Ricaud M, Resche I, Kraeber-Bodere F, Campone M. Evaluation of FDG-PET in early axillary lymph node response to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2006 ASCO Annual meeting proceedings I; 24 (18S): 10500.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Chilcott F, Waikar S, Whitaker T, Ah-See AK, Eremin O, Heys SD, Gilbert FJ, Sharp PF. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18: 1676-1688.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. McDermott GM, Welch A, Staff RT, Gilbert FJ, Schweiger L, Semple SI, Smith A, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Smith IC, Heys SD. Monitoring primary breast cancer throughout chemotherapy using FDG-PET. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006 9; [Epub ahead of print].

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cachin F, Prince HM, Hogg A, Ware RE, Hicks RJ. Powerful prognostic stratification by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 3026-3031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bernard-Marty C, Lebrun F, Awada A, Piccart MJ. Monoclonal antibody-based targeted therapy in breast cancer: current status and future directions. Drugs. 2006; 66: 1577-1591.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wulfing P, Borchard J, Buerger H, Heidl S, Zanker KS, Kiesel L, Brandt B. HER2-positive circulating tumor cells indicate poor clinical outcome in stage I to III breast cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res. 2006; 15: 1715-1720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Burstein HJ, Harris LN, Gelman R, Lester SC, Nunes RA, Kaelin CM, Parker LM, Ellisen LW, Kuter I, Gadd MA, Christian RL, Kennedy PR, Borges VF, Bunnell CA, Younger J, Smith BL, Winer EL. Preoperative therapy with trastuzumab and paclitaxel followed by sequential adjuvant doxorubicin/ cyclophosphamide for HER2 overexpressing stage II or III breast cancer: a pilot study. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 46-53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Rasbridge SA, Gillett CE, Seymour AM, Patel K, Richards MA, Rubens RD, Millis RR. The effects of chemotherapy on morphology, cellular proliferation, apoptosis and oncoprotein expression in primary breast carcinoma. Br J Cancer 1994; 70: 335-341.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Meng S, Tripathy D, Shete S, Ashfaq R, Haley B, Perkins S, Beitsch P, et al. HER-2 gene amplification can be acquired as breast cancer progresses. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004; 101: 9393-9398.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Sekido Y, Umemura S, Takekoshi S, Suzuki Y, Tokuda Y, Tajima T, Osamura RY. Heterogeneous gene alterations in primary breast cancer contribute to discordance between primary and asynchronous metastatic/recurrent sites: HER2 gene amplification and p53 mutation. Int J Oncol. 2003; 22: 1225-1232.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bakir MA, Eccles S, Babich JW, Aftab N, Styles J, Dean CJ, Lambrecht RM, Ott RJ. C-erbB2 protein overexpression in breast cancer as a target for PET using iodine-124-labeled monoclonal antibodies. J Nucl Med 1992; 33: 2154-2160.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Allan SM, Dean C, Fernando I, Accles S, Styles J, McCready VR, Baum M, Sacks N. Radioimmunolocalisation in breast cancer using the gene product of c-erbB2 as the target antigen. Br J Cancer 1993; 67: 706-712.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Perik PJ, Lub-de Hooge MN, Gietema JA, van der Graaf WTA, de Korte MA, Jonkman S, Kosterink JGW, van Veldhuisen DJ, Sleijfer DT, Jager PL, de Vries EGE. 111In-labeled trastuzumab scintigraphy in patients with HER2- positive metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 2276-2282.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Tang Y, Wang J, Scollard DA, Mondal H, Holloway C, Kahn HJ, Reilly RM. Imaging of HER2/neu-positive BT-474 human breast cancer xenografts in athymic mice using (111)In-trastuzumab (Herceptin) Fab fragments. Nucl Med Biol 2005; 32: 51-58.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Nabholtz JM, Buzdar A, Pollak M, Harwin W, Burton G, Mangalik A, Steinberg M, Webster A, von Euler M. Anastrozole is superior to tamoxifen as first-line therapy for advanced breast cancer in post-menopausal women: results of a North American multicenter randomized trial. Arimidex Study Group. J Clin Oncol 19: 2001; 3357-3366.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Spataro V, Price K, Goldhirsch A, Cavalli F, Simoncini E, Castiglione M, Rudenstam CM, Collins J, Lindtner J, Gelber RD. Sequential estrogen receptor determinations from primary breast cancer and at relapse: prognostic and therapeutic relevance. The International Breast Cancer Study Group (formerly Ludwig Group). Ann Oncol. 1992; 9: 733-740.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Brunn Rasmussen B, Kamby C. Immunohistochemical detection of estrogen receptors in paraffin sections from primary and metastatic breast cancer. Pathol Res Pract. 1989; 185: 856-859.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Normanno N, Di Maio M, De Maio E, De Luca A, de Matteis A, Giordano A, Perrone F; NCI-Naple Breast Cancer Group. Mechanisms of endocrine resistance and novel therapeutic strategies in breast cancer. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2005; 4: 721-747.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Dehdashti F, Mortimer JE, Siegel BA, Griffeth LK, Bonasera TJ, Fusselman MJ, Detert DD, Cutler PD, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ. Positron tomographic assessment of estrogen receptors in breast cancer: comparison with FDG-PET and in vitro receptor assays. J Nucl Med. 1995; 10: 1766-1774.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Linden HM, Stekhova SA, Link JM, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Ellis GK, Petra PH, Peterson LM, Schubert EK, Dunnwald LK, Krohn KA, Mankoff DA. Quantitative fluoroestradiol positron emission tomography imaging predicts res- ponse to endocrine treatment in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 18: 2793-2799.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Osborne CK, Shou J, Massarweh S, Schiff R Crosstalk between estrogen receptor and growth factor receptor pathways as a cause for endocrine therapy resistance in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005; 11: 865s-870s.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Atri M. New technologies and directed agents for applications of cancer imaging. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3299-3308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sullivan DC. Molecular imaging in oncology. Ann Oncol 2006; 17: 287-292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Miller KD, Chap LI, Holmes FA, Cobleigh MA, Marcom PK, Fehrenbacher L, Dickler M, Overmoyer BA, Reimann JD, Sing AP, Langmuir V, Rugo HS. Randomized phase III trial of capecitabine compared with bevacizumab plus capecitabine in patients with previously treated metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 792-799.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Collingridge DR, Carroll VA, Glaser M, Aboagye EO, Osman S, Hutchinson OC, Barthel H, Luthra SK, Brady F, Bicknell R, Price P, Harris AL. The develop- ment of [(124)I]iodinated-VG76e: a novel tracer for imaging vascular endothelial growth factor in vivo using positron emission tomography. Cancer Res. 2002; 62: 5912-5919.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Verhagen A, Studeny M, Luurtsema G, Visser GM, De Goeij CC, Sluyser M, Nieweg OE, Van der Ploeg E, Go KG, Vaalburg W. Metabolism of a [18F]fluorine labeled progestin (21-[18F]fluoro-16 alpha-ethyl-19-norprogesterone) in humans: a clue for future investigations. Nucl Med Biol. 1994; 21: 941-952.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Zhou D, Carlson KE, Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ.Bromine- and iodine- substituted 16alpha,17alpha-dioxolane progestins for breast tumor imaging and radiotherapy: synthesis and receptor binding affinity. J Med Chem. 2006; 49: 4737-4744.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    C. P. Schröder

  2. Departments of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    G. A. P. Hospers

  3. Departments of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    P. H. B. Willemse

  4. Departments of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    P. J. Perik

  5. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    E. F. J. de Vries

  6. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    P. L. Jager

  7. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    W. T. A. van der Graaf

  8. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    M. N. Lub-de Hooge

  9. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    E. G. E. de Vries

Authors
  1. C. P. Schröder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. A. P. Hospers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. H. B. Willemse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. J. Perik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. E. F. J. de Vries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. P. L. Jager
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. W. T. A. van der Graaf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. M. N. Lub-de Hooge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. E. G. E. de Vries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Heath Park, CF14 4XN, Cardiff, UK

    Robert E. Mansel MS, FRCS, CBE

  2. Michell Cancer Institute, University of South Alabama, 307 N. University Blvd., 2015, 36688, AL, USA

    Oystein Fodstad PhD

  3. Metastasis and Angiogenesis Research Group, Cardiff University School of Medicine, CF14 4XN, Heath Park, Cardiff, UK

    Wen G. Jiang MB, BCh, MD

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schröder, C.P. et al. (2007). Molecular imaging in metastatic breast cancer. In: Mansel, R.E., Fodstad, O., Jiang, W.G. (eds) Metastasis of Breast Cancer. Cancer Metastasis – Biology and Treatment, vol 11. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5867-7_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation