nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

01.05.2015 | Original Article

¹⁸F-FLT PET/CT as an imaging tool for early prediction of pathological response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a pilot study

verfasst von: Flavio Crippa, Roberto Agresti, Marco Sandri, Gabriella Mariani, Barbara Padovano, Alessandra Alessi, Giulia Bianchi, Emilio Bombardieri, Ilaria Maugeri, Mario Rampa, Maria Luisa Carcangiu, Giovanna Trecate, Claudio Pascali, Anna Bogni, Gabriele Martelli, Filippo de Braud

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 6/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

We evaluated whether ¹⁸F-3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography (FLT PET) can predict the final postoperative histopathological response in primary breast cancer after the first cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT).

Methods

In this prospective cohort study of 15 patients with locally advanced operable breast cancer, FLT PET evaluations were performed before NCT, after the first cycle of NCT, and at the end of NCT. All patients subsequently underwent surgery. Variables from FLT PET examinations were correlated with postoperative histopathological results.

Results

At baseline, median of maximum standardized uptake values (SUV_max) in the groups showing a complete pathological response (pCR) + residual cancer burden (RCB) I, RCB II or RCB III did not differ significantly for the primary tumour (5.0 vs. 2.9 vs. 8.9, p = 0.293) or for axillary nodes (7.9 vs. 1.6 vs. 7.0, p = 0.363), whereas the Spearman correlation between SUV_max and Ki67 proliferation rate index was significant (r = 0.69, p < 0.001). Analysis of the relative percentage change of SUV_maxin the primary tumour (∆SUVT_max(t ₁)) and axillary nodes (∆SUVN_max(t ₁)) after the first NCT cycle showed that the power of ∆SUVT_max(t ₁) to predict pCR + RCB I responses (AUC = 0.91, p < 0.001) was statistically significant, whereas ∆SUVN_max(t ₁) had a moderate ability (AUC = 0.77, p = 0.119) to separate subjects with ΔSUVT_max(t ₁) > −52.9 % into two groups: RCB III patients and a heterogeneous group that included RCB I and RCB II patients. A predictive score μ based on ΔSUVT_max(t ₁) and ΔSUVN_max(t ₁) parameters is proposed.

Conclusion

The preliminary findings of the present study suggest the potential utility of FLT PET scans for early monitoring of response to NCT and to formulate a therapeutic strategy consistent with the estimated efficacy of NCT. However, these results in a small patient population need to be validated in a larger independent cohort.

Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2483–93.PubMed

Bonadonna G, Valagussa P, Brambilla C, et al. Primary chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: eight-year experience at the Milan Cancer Institute. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:93–100.PubMed

von Minckwitz G, Raab G, Caputo A, et al. Doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel every 21 days compared with doxorubicin and docetaxel every 14 days as preoperative treatment in operable breast cancer: the GEPARDUO study of the German Breast Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2676–85.CrossRef

Gianni G, Baselga J, Eiermann W, et al. Feasibility and tolerability of sequential doxorubicin/paclitaxel followed by cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil and its effects on tumor response as preoperative therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:8715–21.CrossRefPubMed

von Minckwitz G, Untch M, Blohmer J, et al. Definition and impact of pathologic complete response on prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in various intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1796–804.CrossRef

Esserman LJ, Berry DA, DeMichele A, et al. Pathologic complete response predicts recurrence-free survival more effectively by cancer subset: results from the I-SPY 1 TRIAL-CALGB 150007/150012, ACRIN 6657. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3242–9.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Sataloff DM, Mason BA, Prestipino AJ, Seinige UL, Lieber CP, Baloch Z. Pathologic response to induction chemotherapy in locally advanced carcinoma of the breast: a determinant of outcome. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;180:297–306.PubMed

Symmans WF, Peintinger F, Hatzis C, et al. Measurement of residual breast cancer burden to predict survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4414–22.CrossRefPubMed

Kaufmann M, Hortobagyi GN, Goldhirsch A, et al. Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: an update. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:1940–9.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:778–85.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Mamounas EP, et al. Recommendations from an International Consensus Conference on the current status and future of neoadjuvant systemic therapy in primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:1508–16.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Corben AD, Abi-Raad R, Popa I, et al. Pathologic response and long-term follow-up in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A comparison between classifications and their practical application. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137:1074–82.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Schott AF, Roubidoux MA, Helvie MA, et al. Clinical and radiologic assessments to predict breast cancer pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;92:231–8.CrossRefPubMed

14.

O’Flynn EA, Desousa NM. Functional magnetic resonance: biomarkers of response in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2011;13:204–40.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

15.

Le-Petross HC, Hylton N. Role of breast MR imaging in neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2010;18:249–58.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Li X, Abramson RG, Arlinghaus LR, et al. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging for predicting pathological response after the first cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Invest Radiol. 2014. doi:10.1097/RLI.0000000000000100

17.

Jacobs MA, Ouwerkerk R, Wolff AC, et al. Monitoring of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using multiparametric, 23Na sodium MR, and multimodality (PET/CT/MRI) imaging in locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;128:119–26.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

18.

Manton DJ, Chaturvedi A, Hubbard A, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: early response prediction with quantitative MR imaging and spectroscopy. Br J Cancer. 2006;94:427–35.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

19.

Meisamy S, Bolan PJ, Baker EH, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer: predicting response with in vivo 1H MR spectroscopy – a pilot study at 4 T. Radiology. 2004;233:424–31.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Cochet A, Generali D, Fox SB, Ferrozzi F, Hicks RJ. Positron emission tomography and neoadjuvant therapy of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2011;43:111–5.CrossRef

21.

Barriolo-Riedinger A, Touzery C, Riedinger JM, et al. [18F]FDG-PET predicts complete pathological response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1915–24.CrossRef

22.

Duch J, Fuster D, Munoz M, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:1551–7.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Hatt M, et al. HER2-overexpressing breast cancer: FDG uptake after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts the outcome of neoadjuvant treatment. Br J Cancer. 2013;109:1157–64.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

24.

Groheux D, Hindie E, Giacchetti S, et al. Early assessment with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography can help predict the outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple negative breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:1864–71.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Koolen BB, Pengel KE, Wesseling J, et al. FDG PET/CT during neoadjuvant chemotherapy may predict response in ER-positive/HER2-negative and triple negative, but not in HER2-positive breast cancer. Breast. 2013;22:691–7.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Humbert O, Berroilo-Riedinger A, Riedinger JM, et al. Changes in 18F-FDG tumor metabolism after a first course of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: influence of tumor subtypes. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:2572–7.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Koolen BB, Pengel KE, Wesseling J, et al. Sequential 18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of complete pathological response in breast and axilla during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:32–40.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Gebhart G, Gamez C, Holmes E, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of response of neoadjuvant lapatinib, trastuzumab, and their combination in HER2-positive breast cancer: results from Neo-ALTTO. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1862–8.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Andrade WP, Lima ENP, Osorio CABT, et al. Can FDG-PET/CT predict early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39:1358–63.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Salskov A, Tammisetti VS, Grierson J, Vesselle H. FLT: measuring tumor cell proliferation in vivo with positron emission tomography and 3′-deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine. Semin Nucl Med. 2007;37:429–39.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Rasey JS, Grierson JR, Wiens LW, et al. Validation of FLT uptake as a measure of thymidine kinase-1 activity in A549 carcinoma cells. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1210–7.PubMed

32.

Been LB, Suurmeijer AJ, Cobben DCP, Elsinga PH, de Vries J, et al. [18F]FLT-PET in oncology: current status and opportunities. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:1659–72.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Pio BS, Park CK, Pietras R, et al. Usefulness of 3′-[F-18]fluoro-3′-deoxythymidine with positron emission tomography in predicting breast cancer response to therapy. Mol Imaging Biol. 2006;8:36–42.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Kenny L, Coombes RC, Vigushin DM, Al-Nahhas A, Shousha S, Aboagye EO. Imaging early changes in proliferation at 1 week post chemotherapy: a pilot study in breast cancer patients with 3′-deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1339–47.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Contractor KB, Kenny LM, Stebbing J, et al. [18F]-3′deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography and breast cancer response to docetaxel. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:7664–72.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Woolf DK, Beresford M, Li SP, et al. Evaluation of FLT-PET-CT as imaging biomarker of proliferation in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:2847–54.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Pascali C, Bogni A, Fugazza L, et al. Simple preparation and purification of ethanol-free solutions of 3'-deoxy-3'-[18F]fluorothymidine by means of disposable solid-phase extraction cartridges. Nucl Med Biol. 2012;39:540–50.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Smyczek-Gargya B, Fersis N, Dittmann H, et al. PET with [18F]fluorothymidine for imaging of primary breast cancer: a pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med. 2004;31:720–4.CrossRef

39.

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Residual cancer burden calculator. http://www3.mdanderson.org/app/medcalc/index.cfm?pagename=jsconvert3. Accessed 29 Jan 2015.

40.

Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991;19:403–10.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, et al. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol. 2013;24:2206–23.

42.

Farwell MD, Pryma DA, Mankoff DA. PET/CT imaging in cancer: current applications and future directions. Cancer. 2014;120:3433–45.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Schwartz JL, Tamura Y, Jordan R, Grierson JR, Krohn KA. Monitoring tumor cell proliferation by targeting DNA synthetic processes with thymidine and thymidine analogs. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:2027–32.PubMed

44.

Kenny LM, Vigushin DM, Al-Nahhas A, et al. Quantification of cellular proliferation in tumor and normal tissues of patients with breast cancer by 18F-fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography imaging: evaluation of analytical methods. Cancer Res. 2005;65:10104–12.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Buck AK, Bommer M, Stilgenbauer S, et al. Molecular imaging of proliferation in malignant lymphoma. Cancer Res. 2006;66:11055–61.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Yamamoto Y, Nishiyama Y, Ishikawa S, et al. Correlation of 18F-FLT and 18F-FDG uptake on PET with Ki-67 immunochemistry in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1610–6.CrossRef

47.

Chalkidou A, Landau DB, Odell EW, et al. Correlation between Ki-67 immunohistochemistry and 18F-Fluorothymidine uptake in patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:3499–513.CrossRefPubMed

48.

Dittmann H, Dohmen BM, Paulsen F, et al. [18F]FLT PET for diagnosis and staging of thoracic tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:1407–12.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Buck AK, Halter G, Schirrmeister H, et al. Imaging proliferation in lung tumors with PET: 18F-FLT versus 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1426–31.PubMed

50.

Hoshikawa H, Nishiyama Y, Kishino T, et al. Comparison of FLT-PET and FDG-PET for visualization of head and neck squamous cell cancers. Mol Imaging Biol. 2011;13:172–7.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Kameyama R, Yamamoto Y, Izuishi K, et al. Detection of gastric cancer using 18F-FLT PET: comparison with 18F-FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:382–8.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Chen W, Cloughesy T, Kamdar N, et al. Imaging proliferation in brain tumors with 18-FLT PET: comparison with 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:945–52.PubMed

53.

van Westreenen HL, Cobben DCP, Jager PL, et al. Comparison of 18F-FLT PET and 18F-FDG in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:400–4.PubMed

54.

van Waarde A, Cobben DC, Suurmeijer AJ, et al. Selectivity of 18F-FLT and 18F-FDG for differentiating tumour from inflammation in a rodent model. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:695–700.PubMed

55.

Kenny LM, Al-Nahhas A, Aboagye EO. Novel PET biomarkers for breast cancer imaging. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32:333–5.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Lubberink M, Direcks W, Emmering J, et al. Validity of simplified 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine uptake measures for monitoring response to chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2012;14:777–82.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

57.

Kinahan PE, Fletcher JW. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography standardized uptake values in clinical practice and assessing response to therapy. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI. 2010;31:496–505.CrossRef

58.

Eckel F, Herrmann K, Schmidt S, et al. Imaging of proliferation in hepatocellular carcinoma with the in vivo marker 18F-fluorothymidine. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1441–7.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Buck AK, Schirrmeister H, Hetzel M, et al. 3-deoxy-3-[(18)F]fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography for noninvasive assessment of proliferation in pulmonary nodules. Cancer Res. 2002;62:3331–4.PubMed

60.

Vesselle H, Grierson J, Muzi M, et al. In vivo validation of 3-deoxy-3-18F-fluorothymidine (18F-FLT) as a proliferation imaging tracer in humans: correlation of 18F-FLT uptake by positron emission tomography with Ki-67 immunohistochemistry and flow cytometry in human lung tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2002;8:3315–23.PubMed

61.

Wang Y, Zhang C, Liu J, Huang G. Is 18F-FDG PET accurate to predict neoadjuvant therapy response in breast cancer? A meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;131:357–69.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384:164–72.CrossRefPubMed

63.

Provenzano E, Vallier A-L, Champ R, et al. A central review of histopathology reports after breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the neo-tango trial. Br J Cancer. 2013;108:866–72.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

64.

Ogston KN, Miller ID, Payne S, et al. A new histologic grading system to assess response of breast cancers to primary chemotherapy: prognostic significance and survival. Breast. 2003;12:320–7.CrossRefPubMed

65.

Chollet P, Abrial C, Durando X, et al. A new prognostic classification after primary chemotherapy for breast cancer: residual disease in breast and nodes (RDBN). Cancer J. 2008;14:128–32.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Marchiò C, Sapino A. The pathologic complete response open question in primary therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2011;43:86–90.CrossRef

67.

Kim S, Kim DH, Jung WH, et al. Metabolic phenotypes in triple negative breast cancer. Tumor Biol. 2013;34:1699–712.CrossRef

68.

Kim SK, Jung WH, Koo JS. Differential expression of enzymes associated with serine/glycine metabolism in different breast cancer subtypes. PLoS One. 2014;9:e101004.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

69.

Kajari K, Tokes T, Dank M, et al. Correlation of the value of 18F-FDG uptake, described by SUVmax, SUVavg, metabolic tumour volume and total lesion glycolysis, to clinicopathological prognostic factors and biological subtypes in breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2015;36:28–37.CrossRef

70.

Vicente G, Castrejon AS, Leon MA, et al. Molecular subtypes of breast cancer: metabolic correlation with 18F-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1304–11.CrossRef

71.

Wu L, Hu J, Gu H, et al. Can diffusion weighted MR imaging and contrast-enhanced MR imaging precisely evaluate and predict pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;135:17–28.CrossRefPubMed

72.

Pengel KE, Koolen BB, Loo CE, et al. Combined use of 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI for response monitoring of breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:1515–24.CrossRefPubMed

73.

Partridge SC, Vanantwerp RK, Doot RK, et al. Association between serial dynamic contrast enhanced MRI and dynamic 18F-FDG PET measures in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;32:1124–31.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

74.

Bahri S, Chen J, Mehta RS, et al. Residual breast cancer diagnosed by MRI in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy with and without bevacizumab. Cancer. 2009;16:1619–28.

Titel: 18F-FLT PET/CT as an imaging tool for early prediction of pathological response in patients with locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a pilot study
verfasst von: Flavio Crippa
Roberto Agresti
Marco Sandri
Gabriella Mariani
Barbara Padovano
Alessandra Alessi
Giulia Bianchi
Emilio Bombardieri
Ilaria Maugeri
Mario Rampa
Maria Luisa Carcangiu
Giovanna Trecate
Claudio Pascali
Anna Bogni
Gabriele Martelli
Filippo de Braud
Publikationsdatum: 01.05.2015
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 6/2015
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-2995-8

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2015

Global and regional brain glucose metabolism decline after systemic chemotherapy

Value of ventilation/perfusion SPECT for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: response to comments by Sinzinger et al.

3′-Deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography as an early predictor of disease progression in patients with advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer

Oligodendroglial component complicates the prediction of tumour grading with metabolic imaging

Molecular imaging of hypoxia in non-small-cell lung cancer

Screening in asymptomatic SDHx mutation carriers: added value of 18F-FDG PET/CT at initial diagnosis and 1-year follow-up