nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

28.07.2018 | Original Article

Local and whole-body staging in patients with primary breast cancer: a comparison of one-step to two-step staging utilizing ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/MRI

verfasst von: Julian Kirchner, Johannes Grueneisen, Ole Martin, Mark Oehmigen, Harald H. Quick, Ann-Kathrin Bittner, Oliver Hoffmann, Marc Ingenwerth, Onofrio Antonio Catalano, Philipp Heusch, Christian Buchbender, Michael Forsting, Gerald Antoch, Ken Herrmann, Lale Umutlu

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 13/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of a one-step to a two-step staging algorithm utilizing ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI in breast cancer patients.

Methods

A total of 38 patients (37 females and one male, mean age 57 ± 10 years; range 31–78 years) with newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer were prospectively enrolled in this trial. All PET/MRI examinations were assessed for local tumor burden and metastatic spread in two separate reading sessions: (1) One-step algorithm comprising supine whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI, and (2) Two-step algorithm comprising a dedicated prone ¹⁸F-FDG breast PET/MRI and supine whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI.

Results

On a patient based analysis the two-step algorithm correctly identified 37 out of 38 patients with breast carcinoma (97%), while five patients were missed by the one-step ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI algorithm (33/38; 87% correct identification). On a lesion-based analysis 56 breast cancer lesions were detected in the two-step algorithm and 44 breast cancer lesions could be correctly identified in the one-step ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI (79%), resulting in statistically significant differences between the two algorithms (p = 0.0015). For axillary lymph node evaluation sensitivity, specificity and accuracy was 93%, 95 and 94%, respectively. Furthermore, distant metastases could be detected in seven patients in both algorithms.

Conclusion

The results demonstrate the necessity and superiority of a two-step ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI algorithm, comprising dedicated prone breast imaging and supine whole-body imaging, when compared to the one-step algorithm for local and whole-body staging in breast cancer patients.

Ryerson AB, Eheman CR, Altekruse SF, Ward JW, Jemal A, Sherman RL, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975–2012, featuring the increasing incidence of liver cancer. Cancer. 2016;122:1312–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29936.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ferlay J, Parkin DM, Steliarova-Foucher E. Estimates of cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2008. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:765–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2009.12.014.CrossRefPubMed

Michaelson JS, Chen LL, Silverstein MJ, Mihm MC Jr, Sober AJ, Tanabe KK, et al. How cancer at the primary site and in the lymph nodes contributes to the risk of cancer death. Cancer. 2009;115:5095–107. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.24592.CrossRefPubMed

Riegger C, Herrmann J, Nagarajah J, Hecktor J, Kuemmel S, Otterbach F, et al. Whole-body FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for staging primary breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:852–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-012-2077-0.CrossRef

Heusner TA, Kuemmel S, Koeninger A, Hamami ME, Hahn S, Quinsten A, et al. Diagnostic value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) compared to FDG PET/CT for whole-body breast cancer staging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:1077–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1399-z.CrossRefPubMed

Heusner TA, Kuemmel S, Hahn S, Koeninger A, Otterbach F, Hamami ME, et al. Diagnostic value of full-dose FDG PET/CT for axillary lymph node staging in breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:1543–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-009-1145-6.CrossRefPubMed

Garami Z, Hascsi Z, Varga J, Dinya T, Tanyi M, Garai I, et al. The value of 18-FDG PET/CT in early-stage breast cancer compared to traditional diagnostic modalities with an emphasis on changes in disease stage designation and treatment plan. Eur J Surg Oncol :J Eur Soc Surg Oncol Br Assoc Surg Oncol. 2012;38:31–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2011.09.002.CrossRef

Filippi V, Malamitsi J, Vlachou F, Laspas F, Georgiou E, Prassopoulos V, et al. The impact of FDG-PET/CT on the management of breast cancer patients with elevated tumor markers and negative or equivocal conventional imaging modalities. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32:85–90. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e328341c898.CrossRefPubMed

Koolen BB, van der Leij F, Vogel WV, Rutgers EJ, Vrancken Peeters MJ, Elkhuizen PH, et al. Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for primary tumor visualization and staging in T1 breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 2014;53:50–7. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2013.783714.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Groheux D, Espie M, Giacchetti S, Hindie E. Performance of FDG PET/CT in the clinical management of breast cancer. Radiology. 2013;266:388–405. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12110853.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Pinker K, Bogner W, Baltzer P, Gruber S, Bickel H, Brueck B, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the breast using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, and 3-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. Investig Radiol. 2014;49:421–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000029.CrossRef

12.

Garcia-Velloso MJ, Ribelles MJ, Rodriguez M, Fernandez-Montero A, Sancho L, Prieto E, et al. MRI fused with prone FDG PET/CT improves the primary tumour staging of patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol. 2017;27:3190–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4685-8.CrossRef

13.

Sawicki LM, Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Buchbender C, Nagarajah J, Umutlu L, et al. Evaluation of (1)(8)F-FDG PET/MRI, (1)(8)F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and CT in whole-body staging of recurrent breast cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85:459–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.12.010.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Janssen NNY, Ter Beek LC, Loo CE, Winter-Warnars G, Lange CAH, van Loveren M, et al. Supine breast MRI using respiratory triggering. Acad Radiol. 2017;24:818–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2017.01.003.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Peccatori FA, Codacci-Pisanelli G, Del Grande M, Scarfone G, Zugni F, Petralia G. Whole body MRI for systemic staging of breast cancer in pregnant women. Breast. 2017;35:177–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2017.07.014.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Pallone MJ, Poplack SP, Avutu HB, Paulsen KD, Barth RJ Jr. Supine breast MRI and 3D optical scanning: a novel approach to improve tumor localization for breast conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:2203–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3598-5.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Mallory MA, Sagara Y, Aydogan F, DeSantis S, Jayender J, Caragacianu D, et al. Feasibility of intraoperative breast MRI and the role of prone versus supine positioning in surgical planning for breast-conserving surgery. Breast J. 2017;23:713–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12796.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Dietzel M, Zoubi R, Burmeister HP, Runnebaum IB, Kaiser WA, Baltzer PA. Combined staging at one stop using MR mammography: evaluation of an extended protocol to screen for distant metastasis in primary breast cancer - initial results and diagnostic accuracy in a prospective study. RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin. 2012;184:618–23. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1271117.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Oehmigen M, Lindemann ME, Lanz T, Kinner S, Quick HH. Integrated PET/MR breast cancer imaging: attenuation correction and implementation of a 16-channel RF coil. Med Phys. 2016;43:4808. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4959546.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Quick HH. Integrated PET/MR. J Magn Reson Imaging: JMRI. 2014;39:243–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24523.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Paulus DH, Quick HH. Hybrid positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging: challenges, methods, and state of the art of hardware component attenuation correction. Investig Radiol. 2016;51:624–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000289.CrossRef

22.

Kartmann R, Paulus DH, Braun H, Aklan B, Ziegler S, Navalpakkam BK, et al. Integrated PET/MR imaging: automatic attenuation correction of flexible RF coils. Med Phys. 2013;40:082301. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4812685.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Spak DA, Plaxco JS, Santiago L, Dryden MJ, Dogan BE. BI-RADS((R)) fifth edition: a summary of changes. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2017;98:179–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2017.01.001.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Moy L, Ponzo F, Noz ME, Maguire GQ Jr, Murphy-Walcott AD, Deans AE, et al. Improving specificity of breast MRI using prone PET and fused MRI and PET 3D volume datasets. J Nucl Med : Off Publ, Soc Nucl Med. 2007;48:528–37.CrossRef

25.

Heusner TA, Hahn S, Jonkmanns C, Kuemmel S, Otterbach F, Hamami ME, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fused positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance mammography: initial results. Br J Radiol. 2011;84:126–35. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/93330765.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Grueneisen J, Nagarajah J, Buchbender C, Hoffmann O, Schaarschmidt BM, Poeppel T, et al. Positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging for local tumor staging in patients with primary breast Cancer: a comparison with positron emission tomography/computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Investig Radiol. 2015;50:505–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000197.CrossRef

27.

Anderson BO, Distelhorst SR. Guidelines for international breast health and cancer control--implementation. Introduction Cancer. 2008;113:2215–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.23980.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, Lord SJ, Warren RM, Dixon JM, et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol : Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3248–58. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.2108.CrossRef

29.

Catalano OA, Daye D, Signore A, Iannace C, Vangel M, Luongo A, et al. Staging performance of whole-body DWI, PET/CT and PET/MRI in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Int J Oncol. 2017;51:281–8. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2017.4012.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Cardoso F, Costa A, Norton L, Senkus E, Aapro M, Andre F, et al. ESO-ESMO 2nd international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC2). Breast. 2014;23:489–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2014.08.009.CrossRef

31.

Melsaether AN, Raad RA, Pujara AC, Ponzo FD, Pysarenko KM, Jhaveri K, et al. Comparison of whole-body (18)F FDG PET/MR imaging and whole-body (18)F FDG PET/CT in terms of lesion detection and radiation dose in patients with breast Cancer. Radiology. 2016;281:193–202. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016151155.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Buchbender C, Heusner TA, Lauenstein TC, Bockisch A, Antoch G. Oncologic PET/MRI, part 2: bone tumors, soft-tissue tumors, melanoma, and lymphoma. J Nucl Med: Off Publ, Soc Nucl Med. 2012;53:1244–52. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.109306.CrossRef

33.

Buchbender C, Heusner TA, Lauenstein TC, Bockisch A, Antoch G. Oncologic PET/MRI, part 1: tumors of the brain, head and neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis. J Nucl Med: Off Publ, Soc Nucl Med. 2012;53:928–38. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.105338.CrossRef

34.

Tabouret-Viaud C, Botsikas D, Delattre BM, Mainta I, Amzalag G, Rager O, et al. PET/MR in breast cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2015;45:304–21. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2015.03.003.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Taneja S, Jena A, Goel R, Sarin R, Kaul S. Simultaneous whole-body (1)(8)F-FDG PET-MRI in primary staging of breast cancer: a pilot study. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:2231–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.09.008.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Pace L, Nicolai E, Luongo A, Aiello M, Catalano OA, Soricelli A, et al. Comparison of whole-body PET/CT and PET/MRI in breast cancer patients: lesion detection and quantitation of 18F-deoxyglucose uptake in lesions and in normal organ tissues. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:289–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.11.002.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Gombos EC, Jayender J, Richman DM, Caragacianu DL, Mallory MA, Jolesz FA, et al. Intraoperative supine breast MR imaging to quantify tumor deformation and detection of residual breast cancer: preliminary results. Radiology. 2016;281:720–9. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016151472.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Kuhl CK, Strobel K, Bieling H, Leutner C, Schild HH, Schrading S. Supplemental breast MR imaging screening of women with average risk of breast cancer. Radiology. 2017;283:361–70. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016161444.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Heusch P, Buchbender C, Beiderwellen K, Nensa F, Hartung-Knemeyer V, Lauenstein TC, et al. Standardized uptake values for [(1)(8)F] FDG in normal organ tissues: comparison of whole-body PET/CT and PET/MRI. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:870–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.01.008.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Local and whole-body staging in patients with primary breast cancer: a comparison of one-step to two-step staging utilizing 18F-FDG-PET/MRI
verfasst von: Julian Kirchner
Johannes Grueneisen
Ole Martin
Mark Oehmigen
Harald H. Quick
Ann-Kathrin Bittner
Oliver Hoffmann
Marc Ingenwerth
Onofrio Antonio Catalano
Philipp Heusch
Christian Buchbender
Michael Forsting
Gerald Antoch
Ken Herrmann
Lale Umutlu
Publikationsdatum: 28.07.2018
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 13/2018
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4102-4

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Local and whole-body staging in patients with primary breast cancer: a comparison of one-step to two-step staging utilizing ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/MRI

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

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

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 13/2018

Translational molecular imaging in exocrine pancreatic cancer

PISCOM: a new procedure for epilepsy combining ictal SPECT and interictal PET

The prognostic value of [123I]-vascular endothelial growth factor ([123I]-VEGF) in glioma

Serial FLT PET imaging to discriminate between true progression and pseudoprogression in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a long-term follow-up study

NaF uptake in unstable plaque: what does fluoride uptake mean?

Comparison of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) PET/CT, SPECT/CT and 3T MRI for the localisation of occult insulinomas: evaluation of diagnostic accuracy in a prospective crossover imaging study