Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and "conventional diagnostic procedures" for the detection of distant metastases in breast cancer patients.
The presence of distant metastases is the main prognostic factor in patients with breast cancer and has a significant influence in the choice of therapy. Therefore, chest X-ray, bone scintigraphy and ultrasound of the abdomen are performed to detect distant metastases at diagnosis and follow-up. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) has been shown to provide sensitive detection of primary tumour and metastases for many tumour entities, but little information is available about the diagnostic value for breast cancer patients. This study retrospectively compared FDG PET for detection of metastatic disease with chest X-ray, bone scintigraphy and ultrasound of the abdomen, referred to as "conventional diagnostic procedures" (CDPs), in 50 breast cancer patients. Imaging procedures were analysed in a blinded fashion with the results classified as "no evidence of metastases", "equivocal" and "evidence of metastases". Clinical follow-up and the results of other imaging modalities including computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging were used to determine if metastases were present. FDG PET identified metastatic disease with a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 90% as compared to 36% and 95% for CDPs, respectively. Regarding "equivocal" and "evidence of metastases" as positive, the sensitivity of CDPs increased to 57% with a corresponding specificity of 81%, whereas sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET remained unchanged. Regarding different localities of metastases the sensitivity of FDG PET was superior in the detection of pulmonary metastases and especially of lymph node metastases of the mediastinum in comparison to chest X-ray, whereas the sensitivity of FDG PET in the detection of bone and liver metastases was of the same magnitude as compared with bone scintigraphy and ultrasound of the abdomen.
Dose
Jörg
J
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, D-20246 Hamburg, Germany. dose@uke.uni-hamburg.de
Bleckmann
C
C
Bachmann
S
S
Bohuslavizki
K H
KH
Berger
J
J
Jenicke
L
L
Habermann
C R
CR
Jãnicke
F
F
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D018270:Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000556:secondary*; D018275:Carcinoma, Lobular / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000556:secondary*; D003952:Diagnostic Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005189:False Positive Reactions; D005260:Female; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; D006801:Humans; D008207:Lymphatic Metastasis; D008875:Middle Aged; D019275:Radiopharmaceuticals; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D014055:Tomography, Emission-Computed
D019275:Radiopharmaceuticals; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18