Prospective comparison of CT and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in N and M staging of primary breast cancer patients: Initial results

Objectives To compare the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced thoraco-abdominal computed tomography and whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI in N and M staging in newly diagnosed, histopathological proven breast cancer. Material and methods A total of 80 consecutive women with newly diagnosed and histopathologically confirmed breast cancer were enrolled in this prospective study. Following inclusion criteria had to be fulfilled: (1) newly diagnosed, treatment-naive T2-tumor or higher T-stage or (2) newly diagnosed, treatment-naive triple-negative tumor of every size or (3) newly diagnosed, treatment-naive tumor with molecular high risk (T1c, Ki67 >14%, HER2neu over-expression, G3). All patients underwent a thoraco-abdominal ceCT and a whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI. All datasets were evaluated by two experienced radiologists in hybrid imaging regarding suspect lesion count, localization, categorization and diagnostic confidence. Images were interpreted in random order with a reading gap of at least 4 weeks to avoid recognition bias. Histopathological results as well as follow-up imaging served as reference standard. Differences in staging accuracy were assessed using Mc Nemars chi2 test. Results CT rated the N stage correctly in 64 of 80 (80%, 95% CI:70.0–87.3) patients with a sensitivity of 61.5% (CI:45.9–75.1), a specificity of 97.6% (CI:87.4–99.6), a PPV of 96% (CI:80.5–99.3), and a NPV of 72.7% (CI:59.8–82.7). Compared to this, 18F-FDG PET/MRI determined the N stage correctly in 71 of 80 (88.75%, CI:80.0–94.0) patients with a sensitivity of 82.1% (CI:67.3–91.0), a specificity of 95.1% (CI:83.9–98.7), a PPV of 94.1% (CI:80.9–98.4) and a NPV of 84.8% (CI:71.8–92.4). Differences in sensitivities were statistically significant (difference 20.6%, CI:-0.02–40.9; p = 0.008). Distant metastases were present in 7/80 patients (8.75%). 18 F-FDG PET/MRI detected all of the histopathological proven metastases without any false-positive findings, while 3 patients with bone metastases were missed in CT (sensitivity 57.1%, specificity 95.9%). Additionally, CT presented false-positive findings in 3 patients. Conclusion 18F-FDG PET/MRI has a high diagnostic potential and outperforms CT in assessing the N and M stage in patients with primary breast cancer.

Download Full-text

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

European Radiology ◽

10.1007/s00330-021-07956-0 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Prospective evaluation of whole-body MRI and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in N and M staging of primary breast cancer patients

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging ◽

10.1007/s00259-020-04801-2 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 47 (12) ◽

pp. 2816-2825 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Nils Martin Bruckmann ◽

Lino M. Sawicki ◽

Julian Kirchner ◽

Ole Martin ◽

Lale Umutlu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Predictive Value ◽

Fdg Pet ◽

Primary Breast Cancer ◽

Whole Body ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Diagnostic Confidence ◽

Whole Body Mri

Abstract Objectives To evaluate and compare the diagnostic potential of whole-body MRI and whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI for N and M staging in newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer. Material and methods A total of 104 patients (age 53.4 ± 12.5) with newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer were enrolled in this study prospectively. All patients underwent a whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI. MRI and 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets were evaluated separately regarding lesion count, lesion localization, and lesion characterization (malignant/benign) as well as the diagnostic confidence (5-point ordinal scale, 1–5). The N and M stages were assessed according to the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual in MRI datasets alone and in 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets, respectively. In the majority of lesions histopathology served as the reference standard. The remaining lesions were followed-up by imaging and clinical examination. Separately for nodal-positive and nodal-negative women, a McNemar chi2 test was performed to compare sensitivity and specificity of the N and M stages between 18F-FDG PET/MRI and MRI. Differences in diagnostic confidence scores were assessed by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results MRI determined the N stage correctly in 78 of 104 (75%) patients with a sensitivity of 62.3% (95% CI: 0.48–0.75), a specificity of 88.2% (95% CI: 0.76–0.96), a PPV (positive predictive value) of 84.6% % (95% CI: 69.5–0.94), and a NPV (negative predictive value) of 69.2% (95% CI: 0.57–0.8). Corresponding results for 18F-FDG PET/MRI were 87/104 (83.7%), 75.5% (95% CI: 0.62–0.86), 92.2% (0.81–0.98), 90% (0.78–0.97), and 78.3% (0.66–0.88), showing a significantly better sensitivity of 18F-FDG PET/MRI determining malignant lymph nodes (p = 0.008). The M stage was identified correctly in MRI and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in 100 of 104 patients (96.2%). Both modalities correctly staged all 7 patients with distant metastases, leading to false-positive findings in 4 patients in each modality (3.8%). In a lesion-based analysis, 18F-FDG PET/MRI showed a significantly better performance in correctly determining malignant lesions (85.8% vs. 67.1%, difference 18.7% (95% CI: 0.13–0.26), p < 0.0001) and offered a superior diagnostic confidence compared with MRI alone (4.1 ± 0.7 vs. 3.4 ± 0.7, p < 0.0001). Conclusion 18F-FDG PET/MRI has a better diagnostic accuracy for N staging in primary breast cancer patients and provides a significantly higher diagnostic confidence in lesion characterization than MRI alone. But both modalities bear the risk to overestimate the M stage.

Download Full-text

Comparison of nodal staging between CT, MRI, and [18F]-FDG PET/MRI in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging ◽

10.1007/s00259-021-05502-0 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Janna Morawitz ◽

Nils-Martin Bruckmann ◽

Frederic Dietzel ◽

Tim Ullrich ◽

Ann-Kathrin Bittner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Lymph Node ◽

Lymph Node Metastases ◽

Fdg Pet ◽

Imaging Modalities ◽

Whole Body ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Predictive Values ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Node Metastases

Abstract Purpose To compare CT, MRI, and [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ([18F]-FDG PET/MRI) for nodal status, regarding quantity and location of metastatic locoregional lymph nodes in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Materials and methods One hundred eighty-two patients (mean age 52.7 ± 11.9 years) were included in this prospective double-center study. Patients underwent dedicated contrast-enhanced chest/abdomen/pelvis computed tomography (CT) and whole-body ([18F]-FDG PET/) magnet resonance imaging (MRI). Thoracal datasets were evaluated separately regarding quantity, lymph node station (axillary levels I–III, supraclavicular, internal mammary chain), and lesion character (benign vs. malign). Histopathology served as reference standard for patient-based analysis. Patient-based and lesion-based analyses were compared by a McNemar test. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were assessed for all three imaging modalities. Results On a patient-based analysis, PET/MRI correctly detected significantly more nodal positive patients than MRI (p < 0.0001) and CT (p < 0.0001). No statistically significant difference was seen between CT and MRI. PET/MRI detected 193 lesions in 75 patients (41.2%), while MRI detected 123 lesions in 56 patients (30.8%) and CT detected 104 lesions in 50 patients, respectively. Differences were statistically significant on a lesion-based analysis (PET/MRI vs. MRI, p < 0.0001; PET/MRI vs. CT, p < 0.0001; MRI vs. CT, p = 0.015). Subgroup analysis for different lymph node stations showed that PET/MRI detected significantly more lymph node metastases than MRI and CT in each location (axillary levels I–III, supraclavicular, mammary internal chain). MRI was superior to CT only in axillary level I (p = 0.0291). Conclusion [18F]-FDG PET/MRI outperforms CT or MRI in detecting nodal involvement on a patient-based analysis and on a lesion-based analysis. Furthermore, PET/MRI was superior to CT or MRI in detecting lymph node metastases in all lymph node stations. Of all the tested imaging modalities, PET/MRI showed the highest sensitivity, whereas CT showed the lowest sensitivity, but was most specific.

Download Full-text

To scan or not to scan: An evaluation of preoperative MRI use in primary breast cancer assessments.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.e14146 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. e14146-e14146

Author(s):

Tesia McKenzie ◽

Davina Matinho ◽

Olivia Scott ◽

Arbaz Khan ◽

Mila Lachica ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Surgical Treatment ◽

False Positive ◽

Primary Breast Cancer ◽

True Positive ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Mri Findings ◽

Positive Rate ◽

The Impact

e14146 Background: Breast cancer (BC) is the most common invasive cancer in adult females.The role of preoperative MRI in assessing the extent of primary breast cancer remains controversial. This study’s objective is to determine if MRIs performed after the diagnosis of invasive/non-invasive-breast cancer will identify additional breast cancers. We hypothesize that preoperative MRIs will result in the discovery of additional significant lesions, leading to changes in surgical treatment. Methods: A retrospective study of 389 BC patient charts were reviewed, dated from January 2000- July 2019. Files were collected from an office in the Breast Cancer Surgery Department. Information on each patient’s imaging studies, treatment, demographics, surgery, and pathology were collected and stored in anonline cloud system. Summary statistics, including proportions, percentages, and difference of proportion hypothesis tests were utilized to interpret the data. All statistical tests were conducted at a 95% confidence interval. Results: We reviewed the charts of 335 patients that met eligibility criteria. In 221 newly diagnosed cancers, a preoperative MRI was taken before treatment. 127 cancers (57.5%)showed additional finding.In BC patients with additional preoperative MRI findings, we observed 61.4%true positive and 38.6%false positive results. These values are comparable to prior studies.We determined that the treatment plan was altered in 17.6%of all patients who received an MRI and in 30.7%of patients with a true positive MRI finding, which is also consistent with previous literature.A majority of the treatment changes were from Lumpectomy to Mastectomy. Conclusions: Literature on MRI use in BC diagnosis exists; our study differs by focusing on newly diagnosed breast cancers.We discovered 35.3% of preoperative MRIs identified a true additional finding in known breast cancer. In addition, our true positive rate (61.4%) and false positive rate (22.2%) of MRI findings is comparable to those of previous studies. Plans were changed in 30.7% of additional findings supporting the idea that preoperative MRI studies are useful when organizing surgical treatment. Further studies to demonstrate the impact on local recurrence rates and overall survival, may clarify the true role of pre-operative MRI in these cases.

Download Full-text

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

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging ◽

10.1007/s00259-018-4102-4 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 45 (13) ◽

pp. 2328-2337 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Julian Kirchner ◽

Johannes Grueneisen ◽

Ole Martin ◽

Mark Oehmigen ◽

Harald H. Quick ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Fdg Pet ◽

Primary Breast Cancer ◽

Whole Body ◽

One Step ◽

18F Fdg

Download Full-text

Abstract P5-01-02: Role of FDG-PET/CT in Metastatic Staging of Newly Diagnosed Primary Breast Cancer

10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs10-p5-01-02 ◽

2010 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

N Niikura ◽

C Costelloe ◽

JE Madewell ◽

N Hayashi ◽

T-K Yu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Fdg Pet ◽

Primary Breast Cancer ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Pet Ct ◽

Fdg Pet Ct

Download Full-text

Whole-body FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for staging primary breast cancer patients

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging ◽

10.1007/s00259-012-2077-0 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 39 (5) ◽

pp. 852-863 ◽

Cited By ~ 49

Author(s):

C. Riegger ◽

J. Herrmann ◽

J. Nagarajah ◽

J. Hecktor ◽

S. Kuemmel ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Patients ◽

Fdg Pet ◽

Primary Breast Cancer ◽

Whole Body ◽

Conventional Imaging ◽

Breast Cancer Patients ◽

Pet Ct ◽

Fdg Pet Ct

Download Full-text

Diagnostic value of [18F]FDG PET/MRI for staging in patients with ovarian cancer

EJNMMI Research ◽

10.1186/s13550-020-00712-3 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Hideaki Tsuyoshi ◽

Tetsuya Tsujikawa ◽

Shizuka Yamada ◽

Hidehiko Okazawa ◽

Yoshio Yoshida

Keyword(s):

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Fdg Pet ◽

Diagnostic Value ◽

Mri Contrast ◽

Diagnostic Potential ◽

Contrast Enhanced Ct ◽

Contrast Enhanced ◽

Imaging Results ◽

N Stage ◽

Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic potential of PET/MRI with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose ([18F]FDG) in ovarian cancer. Materials and methods Participants comprised 103 patients with suspected ovarian cancer underwent pretreatment [18F]FDG PET/MRI, contrast-enhanced CT (ceCT) and pelvic dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (ceMRI). Diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG PET/MRI and ceMRI for assessing the characterization and the extent of the primary tumor (T stage) and [18F]FDG PET/MRI and ceCT for assessing nodal (N stage) and distant (M stage) metastases was evaluated by two experienced readers. Histopathological and follow-up imaging results were used as the gold standard. The McNemar test was employed for statistical analysis. Results Accuracy for the characterization of suspected ovarian cancer was significantly better for [18F]FDG PET/MRI (92.5%) [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84–0.95] than for ceMRI (80.6%) (95% CI 0.72–0.83) (p < 0.05). Accuracy for T status was 96.4% (95% CI 0.96–0.96) and 92.9% (95% CI 0.93–0.93) for [18F]FDG PET/MRI and ceMRI/ceCT, respectively. Patient-based accuracies for N and M status were 100% (95% CI 0.88–1.00) and 100% (95% CI 0.88–1.00) for [18F]FDG PET/MRI and 85.2% (95% CI 0.76–0.85) and 30.8% (95% CI 0.19–0.31) for ceCT and M staging representing significant differences (p < 0.01). Lesion-based sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for N status were 78.6% (95% CI 0.57–0.91), 95.7% (95% CI 0.93–0.97) and 93.9% (95% CI 0.89–0.97) for [18F]FDG PET/MRI and 42.9% (95% CI 0.24–0.58), 96.6% (95% CI 0.94–0.98) and 90.8% (95% CI 0.87–0.94) for ceCT. Conclusions [18F]FDG PET/MRI offers better sensitivity and specificity for the characterization and M staging than ceMRI and ceCT, and diagnostic value for T and N staging equivalent to ceMRI and ceCT, suggesting that [18F]FDG PET/MRI might represent a useful diagnostic alternative to conventional imaging modalities in ovarian cancer.

Download Full-text

Recommendation and Acceptance of Counselling for Familial Cancer Risk in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Cases

Breast Care ◽

10.1159/000517021 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-6

Author(s):

Karin Kast ◽

Julia Häfner ◽

Evelin Schröck ◽

Arne Jahn ◽

Carmen Werner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Genetic Counselling ◽

Primary Breast Cancer ◽

Ductal Carcinoma ◽

Familial Cancer ◽

University Hospital ◽

Tumor Board ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Familial Cancer Risk

Background: In clinical routine, not every patient who is offered genetic counselling and diagnostics in order to investigate a familial cancer risk predisposition opts for it. Little is known about acceptance of counselling and testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer cases in Germany. Methods: All primary breast cancer cases and patients with DCIS (ductal carcinoma in situ) treated at the University Hospital of Dresden between 2016 and 2019 were included. The number of tumor board recommendations for genetic counselling on the basis of the GC-HBOC risk criteria was recorded. Acceptance was analyzed by number of cases with counselling in the GC-HBOC-Center Dresden. Results: Of 996 primary breast cancer and DCIS cases, 262 (26.3%) were eligible for genetic counselling. Recommendation for genetic counselling was accepted by 64.1% (168/262). Of these 90.5% (152/168) opted for molecular genetic analysis. The acceptance rate for counselling increased between 2016 and 2019 from 58.3 to 72.6%. Altogether, 20.4% (31/152) patients were found to carry a pathogenic variant in the breast cancer genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. Conclusion: Acceptance of recommendation is increasing as clinical consequences augment. Optimization in providing information about hereditary cancer risk and in accessibility of counselling and testing is required to further improve acceptance of recommendation.

Download Full-text