Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research 1/2019

Open Access 01.12.2019 | Letter

Letter to the Editor: A response to Hruska’s case study on molecular breast imaging and the need for true tissue quantification

verfasst von: Richard M. Fleming, Matthew R. Fleming, Tapan K. Chaudhuri, William C. Dooley, Andrew McKusick

Erschienen in: Breast Cancer Research | Ausgabe 1/2019

We applaud the efforts by Hruska et al. [1] to quantify differences in tissue using molecular breast imaging (MBI) and background parenchymal uptake (BPU); we have discussed the use of such previously [2]. The approach while commendable did not provide diagnostically useful information to differentiate tissue types. This approach, like the utilization of standardized uptake value (SUV), compares differences in background with tissue [3]. As we have already discussed [2, 4, 5] in the literature, this approach is an incorrect model, due to (1) the critical lack of standardization and calibration of nuclear cameras including both SPECT/Planar and PET; (2) the utilization of ratios which are not absolute values and therefore cannot be used to differentiate tissue based upon those issues, issues which are critical to the understanding of tissue differences; and (3) the inability to truly “measure” transitional changes in tissue, which would allow for the determination of actual treatment response on a per patient basis, saving time, money, and lives.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable. All patent material is proprietary and require licensure.

Authors’ information

Included on cover sheet.
Not applicable.
Consent granted by all authors.

Competing interests

The patent was issued to the primary author by the USPTO. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Fleming RM, Dooley WC. Breast enhanced scintigraphy testing (B.E.S.T.) distinguishes between normal, inflammatory breast changes and breast cancer. A prospective analysis and comparison with mammography. Integr Cancer Ther. 2002;1(3):238–45.CrossRef Fleming RM, Dooley WC. Breast enhanced scintigraphy testing (B.E.S.T.) distinguishes between normal, inflammatory breast changes and breast cancer. A prospective analysis and comparison with mammography. Integr Cancer Ther. 2002;1(3):238–45.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Keys JW Jr. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1836–9. Keys JW Jr. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1836–9.
Metadaten
Titel
Letter to the Editor: A response to Hruska’s case study on molecular breast imaging and the need for true tissue quantification
verfasst von
Richard M. Fleming
Matthew R. Fleming
Tapan K. Chaudhuri
William C. Dooley
Andrew McKusick
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2019
Verlag
BioMed Central
Erschienen in
Breast Cancer Research / Ausgabe 1/2019
Elektronische ISSN: 1465-542X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-019-1103-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2019

Breast Cancer Research 1/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.