Evaluation of new sclerotic bone metastases in breast cancer patients during treatment

2000 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 178-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Çiray ◽  
G. Åström ◽  
I. Andréasson ◽  
T. Edekling ◽  
J. Hansen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Bone Scan ◽  
Conventional Radiography ◽  
World Health ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Who Criteria ◽  
Bone Scans ◽  
Sclerotic Lesions

Purpose: According to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for response of bone metastases to therapy, new lesions indicate progressive disease. We intended to prove that a new sclerotic lesion on conventional radiography may also be a sign of a positive therapeutic response in a previously undetectable lytic metastasis. Material and Methods: In a previous placebo-controlled clinical trial of clodronate (Ostac) therapy, 139 breast cancer patients with bone metastases underwent both conventional radiography and bone scan every 6 months for 2 years with 99mTc before and during clodronate treatment. WHO criteria were applied for therapy response evaluation. Results: In 24 patients, 52 new sclerotic lesions observed during therapy were selected for re-evaluation of conventional radiographs and bone scans. In 8 of the 24 patients, 17 of 52 new sclerotic lesions (33%) had showed positive uptake on previous bone scans. These lesions were possibly misinterpreted as new when applying WHO criteria. Conclusion: For better assessment of new sclerotic lesions during treatment, more sensitive techniques, e.g. bone scan, are needed as a complement to conventional radiography.

scholarly journals Pattern of Skeletal Metastasis in Breast Cancer Patients Attending INMAS, Rajshahi

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-25
Author(s):  
Munshi Md Arif Hosen ◽  
Nasrin Begum ◽  
Pervez Ahmed ◽  
Mosharrof Hossain ◽  
Shefaly Khatun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cervical Spine ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Bone Scan ◽  
Skeletal Metastasis ◽  
Skeletal Metastases ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Common Site

Breast cancer is the most common malignant tumor of females, the incidence increases with age. Bone is the most common site to which breast cancer metastasizes. Between 30% to 85% of patients with metastatic breast cancer develop bone metastases during the course of the disease. Bone scan is the most commonly used means of detecting bone metastasis; it visualizes increases in osteoblastic activity and skeletal vascularity. Many radio-pharmaceuticals (radionuclides) have been used in bone scan including technetium-99m bound to methylene diphosphonate (MDP). Published sensitivity and specificity rates of bone scan for diagnosis varies, with sensitivity ranging from 62% to 100% and specificity from 78% to 100%. However, bone scan is generally considered sensitive for detecting bone metastases on whole-body images.The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern of distribution of skeletal metastases in patients with breast carcinoma by using Tc-99m MDP bone scan. A retrospective study was conducted on 245 consecutive female breast carcinoma patients irrespective of clinical staging, menopausal status and pre-operative / post- mastectomy status, referred for bone scan to Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Rajshahi from July 2015 to June 2017.  The mean age of the patients was 43.4 ± 13.8 years (mean ± SD) with range from 29 to 66 years. Bone scan was performed by an intravenous bolus injection of 20 mCi Tc99m-MDP. Bone phase images were taken at three hours after injection of the radiotracer. Out of 245 studied patients, 163 patients (66.53%) were negative for skeletal metastasis and 82 patients (33.47%) were positive for skeletal metastasis. Out of 82 patients with positive skeletal metastasis, 68 (82.93%) patients had multiple sites (two or more) and 14 (17.07%) patients had solitary site of bony involvement. Out of 68 patients with multiple sites of skeletal metastasis, highest number was noted in thoraco-lumbar spine (80.89%), followed by ribs including sternum and clavicle (57.35%), pelvic bones (47.06%), upper extremities including scapula (41.18%), lower extremities (33.82%), cervical spine (23.53%) and skull bone (8.82%). Among 14 patients with solitary skeletal metastasis, maximum number was noted in thoraco-lumbar spine (64.29%), followed by cervical spine (14.29%), pelvic bone (07.14%), ribs (07.14%) and sternum (07.14%). Skeletal metastases were  much more common in multiple sites than solitary lesion in breast cancer patients. Thoraco-lumbar spine was the most common site of involvement in both solitary and multiple lesions in our study. Axial skeleton was more commonly involved than the appendicular skeleton. Bone scan may pick up bone metastases up to 18 months earlier than conventional radiology, with an average lead of four months. 99m Tc- MDP bone scan is very cost effective in comparison to other imaging modalities (CT, MRI, and PET) and play a major role in early detection of skeletal metastasis in breast cancer patients. Bangladesh J. Nuclear Med. 21(1): 21-25, January 2018

Delay in progression of bone metastases in breast cancer patients treated with intravenous pamidronate: results from a multinational randomized controlled trial. The Aredia Multinational Cooperative Group.

1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 2552-2559 ◽  
Author(s):  
P F Conte ◽  
J Latreille ◽  
L Mauriac ◽  
F Calabresi ◽  
R Santos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Bone Destruction ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
World Health ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Scan Time

PURPOSE Bone metastases are a major cause of morbidity in breast cancer, resulting in complications that include pain, loss of mobility, pathologic fracture, and tumor-induced hypercalcemia (TIH). Inhibition of osteoclast-mediated bone destruction using bisphosphonates represents a promising new management approach. PATIENTS AND METHODS Breast cancer patients with bone metastases were randomly allocated to receive chemotherapy alone (152 patients) or chemotherapy plus pamidronate 45 mg in 250 mL of saline as a 1-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks (143 patients). Whenever possible, treatment continued until progression of disease (PD) in bone appeared on radiographs or bone scan. Time to PD in bone and pain reduction according to a self-assessment six-point scale were selected as primary end points. PD in bone was verified during extramural review (EMR) of all imaging studies by blinded observers, and these data were used as the main efficacy criterion. Analgesic intake, World Health Organization (WHO) performance status, and complications of bone metastases (radiotherapy, TIH, fractures, orthopedic surgery) were also compared in the two groups. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION At EMR, median time to PD in bone was increased by 48% in patients who received pamidronate (249 v 168 days; P = .02, Wilcoxon test). Marked pain relief, defined as a two-point decrease lasting for > or = 6 weeks, was reported by 44% of pamidronate patients and by 30% of controls (P = .025, chi 2 test). The infusions (median, nine per patient; range, 0 to 39) were well tolerated, with no major toxicities reported. Pamidronate by repeated infusion can significantly slow the progression of bone metastases and reduce attendant morbidity.

scholarly journals Does the laterality of breast cancer affect disease outcomes on bone scan?

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-223
Author(s):  
YA Onimode ◽  
AA Adenipekun
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Bone Scan ◽  
Primary Tumour ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Disease Outcomes ◽  
Bone Scans ◽  
The Relationship

Background: The incidence of breast cancer (BC) continues to rise, with the latest record being 2.08 million globally. It also remains the most common female malignancy worldwide. Increasing awareness and screening have been suggested as contributory factors.Objective: To determine the relationship between disease laterality in breast cancer and disease outcome in terms of bone metastasis.Methods: The study is a hospital-based six-year retrospective review of all breast cancer patients who had bone scans done between 2011 and 2016.Results: A total of 992 bone scans (BS) were analysed for 500 (50.4%) patients with left-sided breast cancer and 492 (49.6%) with right-sided breast cancer. While 638 bone scans were abnormal, 354 were benign and 242 (24.39%) were equivocal. There was no association between primary tumour laterality and BS outcome (p = 0.544). Furthermore, Chi-Square for trend assessed the association between patients’ age and BC laterality but yielded no significance (p = 0.67).Conclusion: The laterality of breast cancer did not affect the stage of breast cancer as shown by bone scan outcomes in this study.

scholarly journals Prospective comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/MRI, MRI, CT, and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in the initial staging of primary breast cancer patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Martin Bruckmann ◽  
Julian Kirchner ◽  
Lale Umutlu ◽  
Wolfgang Peter Fendler ◽  
Robert Seifert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Bone Scintigraphy ◽  
Fdg Pet ◽  
Primary Breast Cancer ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Initial Staging

Abstract Objectives To compare the diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG PET/MRI, MRI, CT, and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in the initial staging of primary breast cancer patients. Material and methods A cohort of 154 therapy-naive patients with newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer was enrolled in this study prospectively. All patients underwent a whole-body [18F]FDG PET/MRI, computed tomography (CT) scan, and a bone scintigraphy prior to therapy. All datasets were evaluated regarding the presence of bone metastases. McNemar χ2 test was performed to compare sensitivity and specificity between the modalities. Results Forty-one bone metastases were present in 7/154 patients (4.5%). Both [18F]FDG PET/MRI and MRI alone were able to detect all of the patients with histopathologically proven bone metastases (sensitivity 100%; specificity 100%) and did not miss any of the 41 malignant lesions (sensitivity 100%). CT detected 5/7 patients (sensitivity 71.4%; specificity 98.6%) and 23/41 lesions (sensitivity 56.1%). Bone scintigraphy detected only 2/7 patients (sensitivity 28.6%) and 15/41 lesions (sensitivity 36.6%). Furthermore, CT and scintigraphy led to false-positive findings of bone metastases in 2 patients and in 1 patient, respectively. The sensitivity of PET/MRI and MRI alone was significantly better compared with CT (p < 0.01, difference 43.9%) and bone scintigraphy (p < 0.01, difference 63.4%). Conclusion [18F]FDG PET/MRI and MRI are significantly better than CT or bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Both CT and bone scintigraphy show a substantially limited sensitivity in detection of bone metastases. Key Points • [18F]FDG PET/MRI and MRI alone are significantly superior to CT and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. • Radiation-free whole-body MRI might serve as modality of choice in detection of bone metastases in breast cancer patients.

scholarly journals Surgery for primary tumor benefits survival for breast cancer patients with bone metastases: a large cohort retrospective study

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhangheng Huang ◽  
Xin Zhou ◽  
Yuexin Tong ◽  
Lujian Zhu ◽  
Ruhan Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Prognostic Factors ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The role of surgery for the primary tumor in breast cancer patients with bone metastases (BM) remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of surgery for the primary tumor in breast cancer patients with BM and to develop prognostic nomograms to predict the overall survival (OS) of breast cancer patients with BM. Methods A total of 3956 breast cancer patients with BM from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 2010 and 2016 were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to eliminate the bias between the surgery and non-surgery groups. The Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test were performed to compare the OS between two groups. Cox proportional risk regression models were used to identify independent prognostic factors. Two nomograms were constructed for predicting the OS of patients in the surgery and non-surgery groups, respectively. In addition, calibration curve, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to evaluate the performance of nomograms. Result The survival analysis showed that the surgery of the primary tumor significantly improved the OS for breast cancer patients with BM. Based on independent prognostic factors, separate nomograms were constructed for the surgery and non-surgery groups. The calibration and ROC curves of these nomograms indicated that both two models have high predictive accuracy, with the area under the curve values ≥0.700 on both the training and validation cohorts. Moreover, DCA showed that nomograms have strong clinical utility. Based on the results of the X-tile analysis, all patients were classified in the low-risk-of-death subgroup had a better prognosis. Conclusion The surgery of the primary tumor may provide survival benefits for breast cancer patients with BM. Furthermore, these prognostic nomograms we constructed may be used as a tool to accurately assess the long-term prognosis of patients and help clinicians to develop individualized treatment strategies.

Renal safety profile of ibandronate 6mg infused over 15 or 60 min in breast cancer patients with bone metastases

Bone ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. S107
Author(s):  
F. Schütz ◽  
R. von Moos ◽  
C.B. Caspar ◽  
R. Angst ◽  
R. Inauen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Safety

To Determine the Prevalence of Obesity in Breast Cancer Patients

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Overweight And Obesity ◽  
World Health ◽  
Care Hospital ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Prevalence Of Obesity

Background: Breast Cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Pakistan alone has the highest rate of Breast Cancer than any other Asian country as approximately 90000 new cases are diagnosed every year out of which 40000 dies. Obesity is also a critical public health problem growing with every passing year in Pakistan and worldwide. Research studies are being conducted worldwide regarding the relation between the two problems. Objective: The objective of this study is to determine the prevalence of obesity in breast cancer patients in a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. Methods: BMI is used as a screening tool for overweight and obesity. According to World Health Organization, a body mass index (BMI) over 25 is considered overweight, and over 30 is obese. A retrospective analysis of 262 patients diagnosed with Breast Cancer during 2019 and 2020 was performed. Patients’ hospital records in Oncology were reviewed. The weight in kilograms and height in centimeters of patients were reviewed. Their BMI was calculated and recorded using the SPSS system. Results: The median BMI was 28.25 kg/m2 with an interquartile range of 25.15 - 31.99 kg/m2. Nearly 80% of the study participants had body mass index higher than normal levels (n=203, 77.5%) and out of them approximately half were overweight (n=104, 51.2%) and the remaining were obese (n=99, 48.7%). Conclusion: We conclude from our study that body mass index is positively correlated with breast cancer occurrence and thus the proportion of females having BMI >= 25 was significantly higher among patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document