nach oben

Annals of Nuclear Medicine

Erschienen in:

01.02.2012 | Original article

Usefulness of ¹⁸F-FDG uptake with clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical prognostic factors in breast cancer

verfasst von: Bom Sahn Kim, Sun Hee Sung

Erschienen in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine | Ausgabe 2/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical significance of maxSUV with clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical prognostic factors in patients with primary breast cancer.

Methods

Ninety-one women (48.5 ± 11.2 years of age) with breast cancer who underwent ¹⁸F-FDG PET (PET) before surgery were recruited. All of the breast cancers were invasive ductal carcinomas and ≥1 cm in size to exclude a partial volume effect. The maxSUV of breast cancers was compared with histopathologic and immunohistochemical findings. Additionally, the ability of PET to discriminate axillary nodal status (ANS) and correlation between ANS and tumor characteristics were evaluated.

Results

A high maxSUV of breast cancer was significantly correlated with the following poor prognosis factors: tumor invasiveness >2 cm (2.9 vs. 5.4; p < 0.001); high score of nuclear (3.5 vs. 5.3; p = 0.008) or histologic grade (3.3 vs. 5.5; p < 0.001); MIB-1 ≥10% (3.0 vs. 4.9; p < 0.002); ER-negativity (4.8 vs. 3.8; p = 0.019); PR-negativity (5.0 vs. 3.6; p = 0.029); and triple negativity (ER-, PR-, and c-erbB-2-negative; 5.3 vs. 3.8; p < 0.016). MaxSUV was not affected by menopausal status, ANS, lymphovascular invasion, including CD34 and D2-40 (LVIs), p53, and c-erbB-2 status. Additionally, the sensitivity and specificity of PET for discriminating ANS were 51.1 and 97.8%, respectively. ANS was correlated with tumor invasiveness >2 cm (p = 0.046), LVIs (all of variables; p < 0.001), and triple negativity (p = 0.049).

Conclusions

A high FDG uptake of breast tumor is correlated with several poor prognosis factors, such as tumor invasiveness >2 cm, higher tumor grade, higher MIB-1, hormonal receptor negativity, and triple negativity. However, PET has a limited value in discriminating axillary lymph nodes. Pre-operative PET is a useful modality to predict biologic poor prognosis factors which could affect adjunctive therapy of breast cancer.

Barrett SV. Breast cancer. J R Coll Physic Edinb. 2010;40(4):335–8. (quiz 9).CrossRef

Berriolo-Riedinger A, Touzery C, Riedinger JM, Toubeau M, Coudert B, Arnould L, et al. [18F]FDG-PET predicts complete pathological response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(12):1915–24.PubMedCrossRef

Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Rubello D, Al-Nahhas A, Moretti JL, Espie M, et al. The evolving role of PET/CT in breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31(4):271–3.PubMedCrossRef

Basu S, Chen W, Tchou J, Mavi A, Cermik T, Czerniecki B, et al. Comparison of triple-negative and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma using quantitative fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose/positron emission tomography imaging parameters: a potentially useful method for disease characterization. Cancer. 2008;112(5):995–1000.PubMedCrossRef

Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Moretti JL, Porcher R, Espie M, Lehmann-Che J, et al. Correlation of high 18F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(3):426–35.PubMedCrossRef

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(10):1543–50.PubMedCrossRef

Ueda S, Tsuda H, Asakawa H, Shigekawa T, Fukatsu K, Kondo N, et al. Clinicopathological and prognostic relevance of uptake level using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography fusion imaging (18F-FDG PET/CT) in primary breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008;38(4):250–8.PubMedCrossRef

Veronesi U, De Cicco C, Galimberti VE, Fernandez JR, Rotmensz N, Viale G, et al. A comparative study on the value of FDG-PET and sentinel node biopsy to identify occult axillary metastases. Ann Oncol. 2007;18(3):473–8.PubMedCrossRef

Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, Dose J, Kuhn W, Bense S, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(20):3495–502.PubMed

10.

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. C. W. Elston & I. O. Ellis. Histopathology. 1991;19:403–10. (Histopathology. 2002;41(3A):151–2 (discussion 2–3)).PubMedCrossRef

11.

Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N, Dawkins H, Harvey J, Sterrett G, et al. Histological grading of breast carcinomas: a study of interobserver agreement. Hum Pathol. 1995;26(8):873–9.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Allred DC, Harvey JM, Berardo M, Clark GM. Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Mod Pathol. 1998;11(2):155–68.PubMed

13.

Zafrani B, Aubriot MH, Mouret E, De Cremoux P, De Rycke Y, Nicolas A, et al. High sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemistry for the detection of hormone receptors in breast carcinoma: comparison with biochemical determination in a prospective study of 793 cases. Histopathology. 2000;37(6):536–45.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Hauser-Kronberger C, Dandachi N. Comparison of chromogenic in situ hybridization with other methodologies for HER2 status assessment in breast cancer. J Mol Histol. 2004;35(6):647–53.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Van den Eynden GG, Van der Auwera I, Van Laere SJ, Colpaert CG, van Dam P, Dirix LY, et al. Distinguishing blood and lymph vessel invasion in breast cancer: a prospective immunohistochemical study. Br J Cancer. 2006;94(11):1643–9. PMCID: 2361306.PubMed

16.

Avril N, Menzel M, Dose J, Schelling M, Weber W, Janicke F, et al. Glucose metabolism of breast cancer assessed by 18F-FDG PET: histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis. J Nucl Med. 2001;42(1):9–16.PubMed

17.

Cermik TF, Mavi A, Basu S, Alavi A. Impact of FDG PET on the preoperative staging of newly diagnosed breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(3):475–83.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Heudel P, Cimarelli S, Montella A, Bouteille C, Mognetti T. Value of PET-FDG in primary breast cancer based on histopathological and immunohistochemical prognostic factors. Int J Clin Oncol. 2010;15(6):588–93.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Chung A, Liou D, Karlan S, Waxman A, Fujimoto K, Hagiike M, et al. Preoperative FDG-PET for axillary metastases in patients with breast cancer. Arch Surg. 2006;141(8):783–8. (discussion 8–9).PubMedCrossRef

20.

Gil-Rendo A, Martinez-Regueira F, Zornoza G, Garcia-Velloso MJ, Beorlegui C, Rodriguez-Spiteri N. Association between [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and prognostic parameters in breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2009;96(2):166–70.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Crippa F, Seregni E, Agresti R, Chiesa C, Pascali C, Bogni A, et al. 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(10):1429–34.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Shimoda W, Hayashi M, Murakami K, Oyama T, Sunagawa M. The relationship between FDG uptake in PET scans and biological behavior in breast cancer. Breast Cancer. 2007;14(3):260–8.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Kumar R, Chauhan A, Zhuang H, Chandra P, Schnall M, Alavi A. Clinicopathologic factors associated with false negative FDG-PET in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;98(3):267–74.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Ikenaga N, Otomo N, Toyofuku A, Ueda Y, Toyoda K, Hayashi T, et al. Standardized uptake values for breast carcinomas assessed by fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography correlate with prognostic factors. Am Surg. 2007;73(11):1151–7.PubMed

25.

Mavi A, Cermik TF, Urhan M, Puskulcu H, Basu S, Yu JQ, et al. The effects of estrogen, progesterone, and C-erbB-2 receptor states on 18F-FDG uptake of primary breast cancer lesions. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(8):1266–72.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Osborne JR, Port E, Gonen M, Doane A, Yeung H, Gerald W, et al. 18F-FDG PET of locally invasive breast cancer and association of estrogen receptor status with standardized uptake value: microarray and immunohistochemical analysis. J Nucl Med. 2010;51(4):543–50.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Buck A, Schirrmeister H, Kuhn T, Shen C, Kalker T, Kotzerke J, et al. FDG uptake in breast cancer: correlation with biological and clinical prognostic parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29(10):1317–23.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Peto R, Boreham J, Clarke M, Davies C, Beral V. UK and USA breast cancer deaths down 25% in year 2000 at ages 20–69 years. Lancet. 2000;355(9217):1822.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, Suman VJ, Geyer CE Jr, Davidson NE, et al. Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(16):1673–84.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Piccart M, Lohrisch C, Di Leo A, Larsimont D. The predictive value of HER2 in breast cancer. Oncology. 2001;61(Suppl 2):73–82.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Hortobagyi GN, Esteva FJ. Adjuvant therapy with trastuzumab for HER-2/neu-positive breast cancer. Oncologist. 2006;11(8):857–67.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Bos R, van Der Hoeven JJ, van Der Wall E, van Der Groep P, van Diest PJ, Comans EF, et al. Biologic correlates of (18)fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(2):379–87.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Manie E, Vincent-Salomon A, Lehmann-Che J, Pierron G, Turpin E, Warcoin M, et al. High frequency of TP53 mutation in BRCA1 and sporadic basal-like carcinomas but not in BRCA1 luminal breast tumors. Cancer Res. 2009;69(2):663–71.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Schoppmann SF, Bayer G, Aumayr K, Taucher S, Geleff S, Rudas M, et al. Prognostic value of lymphangiogenesis and lymphovascular invasion in invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):306–12.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Isasi CR, Moadel RM, Blaufox MD. A meta-analysis of FDG-PET for the evaluation of breast cancer recurrence and metastases. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;90(2):105–12.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Zangheri B, Messa C, Picchio M, Gianolli L, Landoni C, Fazio F. PET/CT and breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31(Suppl 1):S135–42.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Braun M, Flucke U, Debald M, Walgenbach-Bruenagel G, Walgenbach KJ, Holler T, et al. Detection of lymphovascular invasion in early breast cancer by D2-40 (podoplanin): a clinically useful predictor for axillary lymph node metastases. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;112(3):503–11.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Schacht V, Dadras SS, Johnson LA, Jackson DG, Hong YK, Detmar M. Up-regulation of the lymphatic marker podoplanin, a mucin-type transmembrane glycoprotein, in human squamous cell carcinomas and germ cell tumors. Am J Pathol. 2005;166(3):913–21.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Usefulness of 18F-FDG uptake with clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical prognostic factors in breast cancer
verfasst von: Bom Sahn Kim
Sun Hee Sung
Publikationsdatum: 01.02.2012
Verlag: Springer Japan
Erschienen in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine / Ausgabe 2/2012
Print ISSN: 0914-7187
Elektronische ISSN: 1864-6433
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-011-0556-1

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

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

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2012

Correlated regions of cerebral blood flow with clinical parameters in Parkinson’s disease; comparison using ‘Anatomy’ and ‘Talairach Daemon’ software

Usefulness of breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality in breast cancer patients with dense breast: a comparative study with MRI

Use of an oral effervescent agent in the evaluation of gastric 67Ga uptake

Erratum to: Evaluation of primary prostate cancer using 11C-methionine-PET/CT and 18F-FDG-PET/CT

The agreement of left ventricular function parameters between 99mTc-tetrofosmin gated myocardial SPECT and gated myocardial MRI

Effect of glycosylation on biodistribution of radiolabeled glucagon-like peptide 1