FDG PET and tumour markers in the diagnosis of recurrent and metastatic breast cancer

被引：0

作者：

Siggelkow W. ^{[1
,3
]}

Rath W. ^{[1
]}

Buell U. ^{[2
]}

Zimny M. ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Obstetrics, RWTH Aachen, Aachen

[2] Department of Nuclear Medicine, RWTH Aachen, Aachen

[3] Universitäts-Frauenklinik, Klinikum der RWTH Aachen, Aachen

来源：

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | 2004年 / 31卷 / SUPPL. 1期

关键词：

Breast cancer; Metastasis; Positron emission tomography; Recurrence; Tumour marker;

D O I：

10.1007/s00259-004-1534-9

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Breast cancer continues to be one of the most common cancers in North America and Western Europe. Positron emission tomography with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG PET) represents a non-invasive functional imaging modality that is based on metabolic characteristics of malignant tumours. In breast cancer, FDG PET is more accurate than conventional methods for staging of distant metastases or local recurrences and enables early assessment of treatment response in patients undergoing primary chemotherapy. Recent data indicate a rationale for the use of FDG PET in cases of asymptomatically elevated tumour marker levels in the presence of uncertain results of conventional imaging. Despite the fact that PET cannot rule out microscopic disease, it does have particular value in providing, in a single examination, a reliable assessment of the true extent of the disease. This technique is complementary to morphological imaging for primary diagnosis, staging and re-staging. It may become the method of choice for the assessment of asymptomatic patients with elevated tumour marker levels. This method, however, cannot replace invasive procedures if microscopic disease is of clinical relevance.

引用

页码：S118 / S124

页数：6

共 43 条

[1]

Avril N., Rose C.A., Schelling M., Dose J., Kuhn W., Bense S., Weber W., Ziegler S., Graeff H., Schwaiger M., Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: Use and limitations, J Clin Oncol, 18, pp. 3495-3502, (2000)

[2]

Danforth Jr. D.N., Aloj L., Carrasquillo J.A., Bacharach S.L., Chow C., Zujewski J., Whatley M., Galen B., Merino M., Neumann R.D., The role of 18F-FDG-PET in the local/regional evaluation of women with breast cancer, Breast Cancer Res Treat, 75, pp. 135-146, (2002)

[3]

Van Dongen J.A., Voogd A.C., Fentiman I.S., Legrand C., Sylvester R.J., Tong D., Van Der Schueren E., Helle P.A., Van Zijl K., Bartelink H., Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10801 trial, J Natl Cancer Inst, 19, pp. 1143-1150, (2000)

[4]

Grunfeld E., Mant D., Yudkin P., Dalton R.A., Cole D., Stewart J., Fitzpatrick R., Vessey M., Routine follow-up for breast cancer in primary care: Randomised trial, BMJ, 13, pp. 665-669, (1996)

[5]

Hathaway P.B., Mankoff D.A., Maravilla K.R., Austin-Seymour M.M., Ellis G.K., Gralow J.R., Cortese A.A., Hayes C.E., Moe R.E., Value of combined FDG PET and MRI imaging in the evaluation of suspected recurrent local-regional breast cancer: Preliminary experience, Radiology, 210, pp. 807-814, (1999)

[6]

Schirrmeister H., Kuhn T., Guhlmann A., Santjohanser C., Horster T., Nussle K., Koretz K., Glatting G., Rieber A., Kreienberg R., Buck A.C., Reske S.N., Fluorine-18 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET in the preoperative staging of breast cancer: Comparison with the standard staging procedures, Eur J Nucl Med, 28, pp. 351-358, (2001)

[7]

Dose J., Bleckmann C., Bachmann S., Bohuslavizki K.H., Berger J., Jenicke L., Habermann C.R., Janicke F., Comparison of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and conventional diagnostic procedures for the detection of distant metastases in breast cancer patients, Nucl Med Commun, 23, pp. 857-864, (2002)

[8]

Ohta M., Tokuda Y., Suzuki Y., Kubota M., Makuuchi H., Tajima T., Nasu S., Suzuki Y., Yasuda S., Shohtsu A., Whole body PET for the evaluation of bony metastases in patients with breast cancer: Comparison with 99Tcm-MDP bone scintigraphy, Nucl Med Commun, 22, pp. 875-879, (2001)

[9]

Yang S.N., Liang J.A., Lin F.J., Kao C.H., Lin C.C., Lee C.C., Comparing whole body 18F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99m methylene diphosphonate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer, J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 128, pp. 325-328, (2002)

[10]

Hayes D.F., Bast R.C., Desch C.E., Fritsche Jr. H., Kemeny N.E., Jessup J.M., Locker G.Y., Macdonald J.S., Mennel R.G., Norton L., Ravdin P., Taube S., Winn R.J., Tumor marker utility grading system: A framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers, J Natl Cancer Inst, 88, pp. 1456-1466, (1996)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →