Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography with fused computerized tomography (PET/CT) in comparison with same day contrast enhanced CT (CE-CT) in breast cancer management. METHOD: Seventy studies in 49 breast cancer patients, 17 for initial and 53 for restaging disease were included. All patients underwent PET/CT for diagnostic purposes followed by CE-CT scans of selected body regions. PET/CT was started approximately 90 minutes following IV injection of 10-15 mCi of F-18 FDG on a GE Discovery PET/CT system. Oral contrast was given before F-18 FDG injection. The CE-CT was performed according to departmental protocol. RESULTS: Out of a total of 257 lesions, 210 were concordant between PET/CT and CE-CT. There were 47 discordant lesions, which were verified by either biopsy (35) or follow-up (12 PET positive CE-CT negative lesions). PET/CT correctly identified 25 true positive (TP). CE-CT identified 2 TP lesions missed by PET/CT which were false negatives (FNs): one liver metastasis with necrosis, which was nonavid to FDG uptake because of necrosis and a second one missed on abdominal metastatic node, which did not change staging or treatment. PET/CT incorrectly identified 2 false positive lesions while CE-CT incorrectly identified 18 false positive. TP recurrence of the disease was found by PET/CT in 44% (15/34 pts), whereas 56% (19/34 pts) were free of disease. The CE-CT described progression of the disease in 1 true negative PET/CT study and no progression in 2 TP PET/CT studies. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive productive value, and negative productive value for PET/CT were 97.8%, 93.5%, 97.3%, 99.1%, 85% and for CE-CT were 87.6%, 42%, 82.1%, 91.6%, 31.7%. CONCLUSION: In this study, PET/CT played a more important role than CE-CT scans alone and provided an impact on the management of breast cancer patients.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 429-434 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Clinical Nuclear Medicine |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 1 2007 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Breast cancer staging
- Contrast enhanced CT (CE-CT)
- PET/CT
- Restaging
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
- Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
Cite this
Impact of PET/CT in comparison with same day contrast enhanced CT in breast cancer management. / Piperkova, Elena; Raphael, Barbara; Altinyay, Mustafa E.; Castellon, Ivan; Libes, Richard; Sandella, Nick; Heiba, Sherif; Abdel-Dayem, Hussein.
In: Clinical Nuclear Medicine, Vol. 32, No. 6, 01.06.2007, p. 429-434.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Impact of PET/CT in comparison with same day contrast enhanced CT in breast cancer management
AU - Piperkova, Elena
AU - Raphael, Barbara
AU - Altinyay, Mustafa E.
AU - Castellon, Ivan
AU - Libes, Richard
AU - Sandella, Nick
AU - Heiba, Sherif
AU - Abdel-Dayem, Hussein
PY - 2007/6/1
Y1 - 2007/6/1
N2 - PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography with fused computerized tomography (PET/CT) in comparison with same day contrast enhanced CT (CE-CT) in breast cancer management. METHOD: Seventy studies in 49 breast cancer patients, 17 for initial and 53 for restaging disease were included. All patients underwent PET/CT for diagnostic purposes followed by CE-CT scans of selected body regions. PET/CT was started approximately 90 minutes following IV injection of 10-15 mCi of F-18 FDG on a GE Discovery PET/CT system. Oral contrast was given before F-18 FDG injection. The CE-CT was performed according to departmental protocol. RESULTS: Out of a total of 257 lesions, 210 were concordant between PET/CT and CE-CT. There were 47 discordant lesions, which were verified by either biopsy (35) or follow-up (12 PET positive CE-CT negative lesions). PET/CT correctly identified 25 true positive (TP). CE-CT identified 2 TP lesions missed by PET/CT which were false negatives (FNs): one liver metastasis with necrosis, which was nonavid to FDG uptake because of necrosis and a second one missed on abdominal metastatic node, which did not change staging or treatment. PET/CT incorrectly identified 2 false positive lesions while CE-CT incorrectly identified 18 false positive. TP recurrence of the disease was found by PET/CT in 44% (15/34 pts), whereas 56% (19/34 pts) were free of disease. The CE-CT described progression of the disease in 1 true negative PET/CT study and no progression in 2 TP PET/CT studies. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive productive value, and negative productive value for PET/CT were 97.8%, 93.5%, 97.3%, 99.1%, 85% and for CE-CT were 87.6%, 42%, 82.1%, 91.6%, 31.7%. CONCLUSION: In this study, PET/CT played a more important role than CE-CT scans alone and provided an impact on the management of breast cancer patients.
AB - PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography with fused computerized tomography (PET/CT) in comparison with same day contrast enhanced CT (CE-CT) in breast cancer management. METHOD: Seventy studies in 49 breast cancer patients, 17 for initial and 53 for restaging disease were included. All patients underwent PET/CT for diagnostic purposes followed by CE-CT scans of selected body regions. PET/CT was started approximately 90 minutes following IV injection of 10-15 mCi of F-18 FDG on a GE Discovery PET/CT system. Oral contrast was given before F-18 FDG injection. The CE-CT was performed according to departmental protocol. RESULTS: Out of a total of 257 lesions, 210 were concordant between PET/CT and CE-CT. There were 47 discordant lesions, which were verified by either biopsy (35) or follow-up (12 PET positive CE-CT negative lesions). PET/CT correctly identified 25 true positive (TP). CE-CT identified 2 TP lesions missed by PET/CT which were false negatives (FNs): one liver metastasis with necrosis, which was nonavid to FDG uptake because of necrosis and a second one missed on abdominal metastatic node, which did not change staging or treatment. PET/CT incorrectly identified 2 false positive lesions while CE-CT incorrectly identified 18 false positive. TP recurrence of the disease was found by PET/CT in 44% (15/34 pts), whereas 56% (19/34 pts) were free of disease. The CE-CT described progression of the disease in 1 true negative PET/CT study and no progression in 2 TP PET/CT studies. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive productive value, and negative productive value for PET/CT were 97.8%, 93.5%, 97.3%, 99.1%, 85% and for CE-CT were 87.6%, 42%, 82.1%, 91.6%, 31.7%. CONCLUSION: In this study, PET/CT played a more important role than CE-CT scans alone and provided an impact on the management of breast cancer patients.
KW - Breast cancer staging
KW - Contrast enhanced CT (CE-CT)
KW - PET/CT
KW - Restaging
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34249038610&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34249038610&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/RLU.0b013e31805375e0
DO - 10.1097/RLU.0b013e31805375e0
M3 - Article
C2 - 17515747
AN - SCOPUS:34249038610
VL - 32
SP - 429
EP - 434
JO - Clinical Nuclear Medicine
JF - Clinical Nuclear Medicine
SN - 0363-9762
IS - 6
ER -