Breast

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139026543.013

Chapter 11 - Breast

from Part II - Oncologic applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 September 2012

Muhammad A. Chaudhry and

Richard L. Wahl

Edited by

Victor H. Gerbaudo

Show author details

Victor H. Gerbaudo: Affiliation:
Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer and is the second leading cause of cancermortality in women. It was estimated that 207, 090 women would be diagnosed with and 39, 840 womenwould die of cancer of the breast in 2010 in the USA. There is a rising incidence of breast cancer;however, on the brighter side, there has been a decline in mortality over the last several years(1). These changes are attributed to both early diagnosis and more effective treatment. Risk factorsfor breast cancer include age, family history and genetics, a later first pregnancy, andobesity.

Infiltrating or invasive ductal cancer is the most common histological type of breast cancer andcomprises 70–80% of all cases. Other types of breast cancer include DCIS (ductal carcinoma insitu), LCIS (lobular carcinoma in situ), and inflammatory and invasive lobular carcinoma. Tumorsinvolving the nipple are classified as Paget's disease (intraductal and invasive ductal).

Initial disease staging is a crucial step in optimizing the management of breast cancer patients.Increasingly, molecular phenotyping of breast cancer is applied to help ascertain whether the canceris likely to respond to chemotherapy or immunotherapy. A variety of factors influence the choice oftreatment options including but not limited to age, menopausal status, local disease status (e.g.,size and extent of the mass), axillary nodal disease involvement, hormone receptor status(estrogen/progesterone receptor expression), and Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2/neu)expression.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: A Case-Based Approach to PET/CT in Oncology , pp. 267 - 292

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139026543.013 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2009–2010www.cancer.org

Hellman, SHarris, JR.Natural history of breast cancerHarris, JRLippman, MEMarrow, MOsborne, CKDiseases of the BreastPhiladelphiaLippincott Williams and Wilkins 2000 407Google Scholar

Whitman, GJ.The role of mammography in breast cancer preventionCurr Opin Oncol 1999 11 414CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dean, JCIlvento, CC.Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancersAm J Roentgenol 2006 187 20CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Feig, SA.Role and evaluation of mammography and other imaging methods for breast cancer detection, diagnosis, and stagingSemin Nucl Med 1999 29 3CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Sickles, EA.Mammographic features of early breast cancerAm J Roentgenol 1984 143 461CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Moskowitz, M.The predictive value of certain mammographic signs in screening for breast cancerCancer 1983 51 10073.0.CO;2-P>CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Waljee, DFNewman, LA.Neoadjuvant systemic therapy and the surgical managnent of breast cancerSurg Clin N Am 2007 87 399CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Fisher, BDignam, KWolmark, NLumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project B-17J Clin Oncol 1998 16 441CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Fisher, BAnderson, SBrynat, JTwenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancerN Engl J Med 2002 347 1233CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Pindar, MCBuzdar, AU.Endocrine therapy for breast cancerFreedman, RSBuzdar, AUBreast CancerHouston, TXMD Anderson Cancer Care Center 2008 411Google Scholar

Slamon, DJGodolphin, WJones, LAStudies of HER2/neu proto-oncogene in human breast and ovarian cancerScience 1989 12 707CrossRef Google Scholar

Slamon, DJEirmann, NRPienkowski, MMPhase III Randomized trial comparing doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel (AC-> T) with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel and trastuzumab (AC-> TH) with docetaxel, carboplatin and trastuzumab (TCH) in HER2 positive early breast cancer patients: BCIRG 006 study [abstract 1]Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005 94 S5Google Scholar

Buzdar, AUSingletary, SEValero, VEvaluation of paclitaxel in adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with operable breast cancer: preliminary data of a prospective randomized trialClin Cancer Res 2002 8 1073Google Scholar PubMed

Bakheet, SMPowe, JKandil, AF-18 FDG uptake in breast infection and inflammationClin Nucl Med 2000 25 100CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Tatsumi, MCohade, CMourtzikos, KAFishman, EKWahl, RL.Initial experience with FDG-PET/CT in the evaluation of breast cancerEur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006 33 254CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Wahl, RLSiegel, BAColeman, REPET Study Group. Prospective multicenter study of axillary nodal staging by positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a report of the Staging Breast Cancer with PET Study GroupJ Clin Oncol 2004 22 277CrossRef Google Scholar

Bos, Rvan Der Hoeven, JJvan Der Wall, EBiologic correlates of (18)fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomographyJ Clin Oncol 2002 20 379CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Crippa, FSeregni, EAgresti, RAssociation between [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and postoperative histopathology, hormone receptor status, thymidine labelling index and p53 in primary breast cancer: a preliminary observationEur J Nucl Med 1998 25 1429CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hoh, CKHawkins, RAGlaspy, JACancer detection with whole-body PET using 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucoseJ Comput Assist Tomogr 1993 17 582CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Cook, GJHouston, SRubens, RMaisey, MNFogelman, I.Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesionsJ Clin Oncol 1998 16 3375CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Schirrmeister, HKuhn, TGuhlmann, AFluorin-18 2-deoxy-2-fluoror-D-glucose PET in the preoperative staging of breast cancer: comparison with the standard staging procedureEur J Nucl Med 2001 28 351CrossRef Google Scholar

Heusner, TAKuemmel, SUmutlu, LBreast cancer staging in a single session: whole-body PET/CT mammographyJ Nucl Med 2008 49 1215CrossRef Google Scholar

Heusner, Kuemmel, SKoeninger, ADiagnostic value of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) compared to FDG PET/CT for whole-body breast cancer stagingEur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010 37 1077CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mahner, SSchirrmacher, SBrenner, WComparison between positron emission tomography using 2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose, conventional imaging and computed tomography for staging of breast cancerAnn Oncol 2008 19 1249CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Chae, BJBae, JSKang, BJPositron emission tomography-computed tomography in the detection of axillary lymph node metastasis in patients with early breast cancerJpn J Clin Oncol 2009 39 284CrossRef Google Scholar

Moon, DHMaddahi, JSilerman, DHAccuracy of whole body fluorine-18-FDG PET for the detection of recurrent or metastatic breast carcinomaJ Nucl Med 1998 39 431Google Scholar PubMed

Bender, HKirst, JPalmedo, HValue of 18fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the staging of recurrent breast carcinomaAnticancer Res 1997 17 1687Google Scholar PubMed

Wahl, RLZasadny, KHelvie, MMetabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluationJ Clin Oncol 1993 11 2101CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Schelling, MAvril, NNahrig, JPositron emission tomography using [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancerJ Clin Oncol 2000 18 1689CrossRef Google Scholar

Stafford, SEGralow, JRSchubert, EKUse of serial FDG PET to measure the response of bone-dominant breast cancer to therapyAcad Radiol 2002 9 913CrossRef Google Scholar

Berg, WAMadsen, KSSchilling, KBreast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breastRadiology 2011 258 59CrossRef Google Scholar

Schilling, KNarayanan, DKalinyak, JEPositron emission mammography in breast cancer presurgical planning: comparison with magnetic resonance imagingEur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011 38 23CrossRef Google Scholar

Taira, NOhsumi, STakabatake, DDetermination of indication for sentinel lymph node biopsy in clinical node-negative breast cancer using preoperative 18F-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography fusion imagingJpn J Clin Oncol 2009 39 16CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Walter, CScheidhauer, KScharl, AClinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MRI mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesionsEur J Radiol 2003 13 1651CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Avril, NRosé, CASchelling, MBreast imaging with poriston emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitationsJ Clin Oncol 2000 18 3495CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Adler, LPCrowe, JPal-Kaisi, NKSunshine, JL.Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PETRadiology 1993 187 743CrossRef Google Scholar

Avril, NDose, JJanicke, FMetabolic characterization of breast tumors with positron emission tomography using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucoseJ Clin Oncol 1996 14 1848CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Scheidhauer, KScharl, APietrzyk, UQualitative 18F-FDG positron emission tomography in primary breast cancer; clinical relevance and practicabilityEur J Nucl Med 1996 23 618CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dehdashti, FMortimer, JESiegel, BAPositron tomographic assessment of estrogen receptors in breast cancer: comparison with FDG-PET and in vitro receptor assaysJ Nucl Med 1995 36 1766Google Scholar PubMed

Palmedo, HBender, HGrünwald, FComparison of fluorine-18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile scintimammography in the detection of breast tumoursEur J Nucl Med 1997 24 1138Google Scholar

Nitzsche, EUHoh, CKDalbohm, NMWhole body positron emission tomography in breast cancerRofo Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr 1993 158 293CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Heinisch, MGallowitsch, HJMikosch, PComparison of FDG-PET and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in the evaluation of suggestive of breast lesionsBreast 2003 12 17CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Yutani, KShiba, EKusuoka, HComparison of FDG-PET with MIBI_SPECT in the detection of breast cancer and axillary lymph node metastasisJ Comput Assist Tomogr 2000 24 274CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Wahl, RLCody, RLHutchins, GDMudgett, EE.Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabeled glucose analogue 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucoseRadiology 1991 179 765CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Iagaru, AMasamed, RKeesara, SBreast MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in the management of breast cancerAnn Nucl Med 2007 21 33CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Goerres, GWMichel, SCFehr, MKFollow-up of women with breast cancer: comparison between MRI and FDG-PETEur Radiol 2003 13 1635CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Heinisch, MGallowitsch, HJMikosch, PComparison of FDG-PET and dynamic contrast enhanced RM in the evaluation of suggestive of breast lesionsBreast 2003 12 17CrossRef Google Scholar

Monzawa, SAdachi, SSuzuki, KDiagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computer tomography of breast cancer in detecting axillary lymph node metastasis: comparison with ultrasonography and contrast-enhanced CTAnn Nucl Med 2009 23 855CrossRef Google Scholar

Heusner, TAKuemmel, SHahn, SDiagnostic value of full-dose FDG PET/CT for axillary lymph node staging in breast cancer patientsEur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009 36 1543CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Fuster, DDuch, JParedes, PPreoperative staging of large primary breast cancer with 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission/computed tomography compared with conventional proceduresJ Clin Oncol 2008 26 4746CrossRef Google Scholar

Ueda, Tsuda, HAsakawa, HUtility of 18F-Fluoro-deoxyglucose emission tomography/computed tomography fusion imaging (18F-FDG PET/CT) in combination with ultrasonography for axillary staging in primary breast cancerBMC Cancer 2008 8CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Utech, CIYoung, CSWinter, PFProspective evaluation of FDG-PET in breast cancer for staging of the axilla related to surgery and immunocytochemistryEur J Nucl Med 1996 23 1588CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.