Abstract
Purpose: The study aims to assess the role of SUVs, MTV, TLG, and other FDG PET metric data in predicting the prognosis of patients with newly diagnosed BC.
Materials and Methods: A systematic review was conducted by using three different databases: Pub- Med, Web of Science, and EMBASE, in the period between January 2011 and May 2021. Studies on the use of FDG PET in BC patients concerning the utility of metric PET data and survival were retrieved. The following keywords were used in diverse combinations: “breast cancer”, “18F-FDG”, “FDG”, “PET”, “PET/CT”, “FDG PET”, “volumetric parameters”, “metabolic tumor volume”, “MTV”, “total lesion glycolysis”, “TLG”, “prognosis”, “prognostic”. No limits were applied. The quality of selected papers was assessed by using specific criteria.
Results: Totally 123 articles were retrieved, but only 14 studies were selected. In the selected papers, overall, the number of patients was 1850. Overall survival (OS) was the main outcome in three studies, while both OS and disease-free survival (DFS) were considered in the remainder of most papers. PET/CT was performed in patients with BC before surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 6 studies and in metastatic BC in 8. At multivariable analyses, diverse PET metrics, such as SUVmax, MTV, and TLG, were correlated to recurrence or OS. However, a large heterogeneity for the proposal cut-off, able to discriminate between poor and good prognosis, was found.
Conclusion: PET metrics are helpful for the prognosis stratification in patients with locally advanced or metastatic BC. However, no specific cut-off values for these variables are now available in this setting of patients.
Keywords: Breast cancer, PET/CT, prognosis, metabolic tumor volume, total lesion glycolysis, fluorodeoxyglucose.
[1]
Gomes I, Aguiar P, Miranda A, Nunes C. Overall survival of patients with locoregional and metastatic breast cancer: Is the influence of baseline characteristics the same? Anticancer Res 2019; 39(9): 5135-42.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13708] [PMID: 31519625]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13708] [PMID: 31519625]
[2]
Groheux D, Hindie E. Breast cancer: Initial workup and staging with FDG PET/CT. Clin Transl Imaging 2021; 9(3): 1-11.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-021-00426-z] [PMID: 33937141]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40336-021-00426-z] [PMID: 33937141]
[3]
Groheux D, Cochet A, Humbert O, Alberini JL, Hindié E, Mankoff D. 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging and restaging of breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2016; 57 (Suppl. 1): 17S-26S.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.157859] [PMID: 26834096]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.157859] [PMID: 26834096]
[4]
Garami Z, Hascsi Z, Varga J, et al. The value of 18-FDG PET/CT in early-stage breast cancer compared to traditional diagnostic modalities with an emphasis on changes in disease stage designation and treatment plan. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012; 38(1): 31-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2011.09.002] [PMID: 21937190]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2011.09.002] [PMID: 21937190]
[5]
Evangelista L, Cervino AR, Ghiotto C, Al-Nahhas A, Rubello D, Muzzio PC. Tumor marker-guided PET in breast cancer patients-a recipe for a perfect wedding: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med 2012; 37(5): 467-74.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e31824850b0] [PMID: 22475896]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e31824850b0] [PMID: 22475896]
[6]
Fowler AM, Cho SY. PET imaging for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2021; 59(5): 725-35.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2021.05.004] [PMID: 34392915]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2021.05.004] [PMID: 34392915]
[7]
Ulaner GA, Eaton A, Morris PG, et al. Prognostic value of quantitative fluorodeoxyglucose measurements in newly diagnosed metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Med 2013; 2(5): 725-33.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.119] [PMID: 24403238]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.119] [PMID: 24403238]
[8]
Hyun SH, Ahn HK, Park YH, et al. Volume-based metabolic tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with an increased risk of recurrence in breast cancer. Radiology 2015; 275(1): 235-44.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14141129] [PMID: 25496075]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14141129] [PMID: 25496075]
[9]
Evangelista L, Cervino AR, Ghiotto C, et al. Could semiquantitative FDG analysis add information to the prognosis in patients with stage II/III breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant treatment? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42(11): 1648-55.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3088-4] [PMID: 26025244]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3088-4] [PMID: 26025244]
[10]
Urso L, Quartuccio N, Caracciolo M, et al. Impact on the long-term prognosis of FDG PET/CT in luminal-A and luminal-B breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2022; 43(2): 212-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000001500] [PMID: 35022378]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000001500] [PMID: 35022378]
[11]
Suresh Malapure S, Das KJ, Kumar R. PET/Computed tomography in breast cancer: Can it aid in developing a personalized treatment design? PET Clin 2016; 11(3): 297-303.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpet.2016.02.006] [PMID: 27321033]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpet.2016.02.006] [PMID: 27321033]
[12]
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015; 4(1): 1.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1] [PMID: 25554246]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1] [PMID: 25554246]
[13]
Lee J, Vali Y, Zafarmand M, Bossuyt P. Quality Assessment of Prognostic Accuracy Studies (QUAPAS): An extension of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS‐2) tool for systematic reviews of prognostic test accuracy studies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 1 (Suppl. 1).
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD201901]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD201901]
[14]
García VAM, Soriano CÁ, López-Fidalgo JF, et al. Basal 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography as a prognostic biomarker in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42(12): 1804-13.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3102-x] [PMID: 26156534]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-015-3102-x] [PMID: 26156534]
[15]
Tello GMJ, García VAM, Pérez BJ, et al. Global heterogeneity assessed with 18F-FDG PET/CT. Relation with biological variables and prognosis in locally advanced breast cancer. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2019; 38(5): 290-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.remnie.2019.03.002] [PMID: 31427247]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.remnie.2019.03.002] [PMID: 31427247]
[16]
Kitajima K, Yamano T, Miyoshi Y, Katsuura T, Enoki T, Yamakado K. Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT prior to breast cancer treatment. Comparison with magnetic resonance spectroscopy and diffusion weighted imaging. Hell J Nucl Med 2019; 22(1): 25-35.
[PMID: 30843007]
[PMID: 30843007]
[17]
Kitajima K, Miyoshi Y, Sekine T, et al. Harmonized pretreatment quantitative volume-based 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters for stage IV breast cancer prognosis. Multicenter study in Japan. Hell J Nucl Med 2020; 23(3): 272-89.
[PMID: 33367302]
[PMID: 33367302]
[18]
Qu YH, Long N, Ran C, Sun J. The correlation of 18F-FDG PET/CT metabolic parameters, clinicopathological factors, and prognosis in breast cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 2021; 23(3): 620-7.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12094-020-02457-w] [PMID: 32683540]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12094-020-02457-w] [PMID: 32683540]
[19]
Kim YI, Kim YJ, Paeng JC, et al. Prediction of breast cancer recurrence using lymph node metabolic and volumetric parameters from 18F-FDG PET/CT in operable triple-negative breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44(11): 1787-95.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3748-7] [PMID: 28616695]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3748-7] [PMID: 28616695]
[20]
Naghavi-Behzad M, Petersen CB, Vogsen M, Braad PE, Hildebrandt MG, Gerke O. Prognostic value of dual-time-point 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT in metastatic breast cancer: An exploratory study of quantitative measures. Diagnostics (Basel) 2020; 10(6): 398.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10060398] [PMID: 32545312]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10060398] [PMID: 32545312]
[21]
Kitajima K, Miyoshi Y, Sekine T, et al. Harmonized pretreatment quantitative volume-based FDG-PET/CT parameters for prognosis of stage I-III breast cancer: Multicenter study. Oncotarget 2021; 12(2): 95-105.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.27851] [PMID: 33520114]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.27851] [PMID: 33520114]
[22]
Jiménez-Ballvé A, García García-Esquinas M, Salsidua-Arroyo O, et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumour volume and total lesion glycolysis in 18F-FDG PET/CT scans in locally advanced breast cancer staging. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2016; 35(6): 365-72.
[PMID: 26948652]
[PMID: 26948652]
[23]
Marinelli B, Espinet-Col C, Ulaner GA, et al. Prognostic value of FDG PET/CT-based metabolic tumor volumes in metastatic triple negative breast cancer patients. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 6(2): 120-7.
[PMID: 27186439]
[PMID: 27186439]
[24]
Son SH, Lee SW, Jeong SY, et al. Whole-body metabolic tumor volume, as determined by (18)F-FDG PET/CT, as a prognostic factor of outcome for patients with breast cancer who have distant metastasis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015; 205(4): 878-85.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13906] [PMID: 26204115]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13906] [PMID: 26204115]
[25]
Li G, Hu J, Hu G. Biomarker studies in early detection and prognosis of breast cancer. Adv Exp Med Biol 2017; 1026: 27-39.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6020-5_2] [PMID: 29282678]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6020-5_2] [PMID: 29282678]
[26]
Li J, Chen Z, Su K, Zeng J. Clinicopathological classification and traditional prognostic indicators of breast cancer. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2015; 8(7): 8500-5.
[PMID: 26339424]
[PMID: 26339424]
[27]
Thie JA. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med 2004; 45(9): 1431-4.
[PMID: 15347707]
[PMID: 15347707]
[28]
Coroller TP, Agrawal V, Huynh E, et al. Radiomic-based pathological response prediction from primary tumors and lymph nodes in NSCLC. J Thorac Oncol 2017; 12(3): 467-76.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2016.11.2226] [PMID: 27903462]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2016.11.2226] [PMID: 27903462]
[29]
Alic L, Niessen WJ, Veenland JF. Quantification of heterogeneity as a biomarker in tumor imaging: A systematic review. PLoS One 2014; 9(10): e110300.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0110300] [PMID: 25330171]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0110300] [PMID: 25330171]
[30]
Sollini M, Cozzi L, Ninatti G, et al. PET/CT radiomics in breast cancer: Mind the step. Methods 2021; 188: 122-32.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2020.01.007] [PMID: 31978538]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ymeth.2020.01.007] [PMID: 31978538]
[31]
Jung JH, Son SH, Kim DH, et al. Consort-independent prognostic value of asphericity of pretherapeutic F-18 Fdg uptake by primary tumors in patients with breast cancer. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017; 96(46): e8438.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000008438] [PMID: 29145250]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000008438] [PMID: 29145250]
[32]
Hofheinz F, Lougovski A, Zöphel K, et al. Increased evidence for the prognostic value of primary tumor asphericity in pretherapeutic FDG PET for risk stratification in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42(3): 429-37.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2953-x] [PMID: 25416633]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2953-x] [PMID: 25416633]
[33]
Marcu LG, Moghaddasi L, Bezak E. Imaging of tumor characteristics and molecular pathways with PET: Developments over the last decade toward personalized cancer therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2018; 102(4): 1165-82.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.04.055] [PMID: 29907486]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.04.055] [PMID: 29907486]
[34]
Carmona-Bozo JC, Manavaki R, Woitek R, et al. Hypoxia and perfusion in breast cancer: Simultaneous assessment using PET/MR imaging. Eur Radiol 2021; 31(1): 333-44.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07067-2] [PMID: 32725330]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07067-2] [PMID: 32725330]
[35]
Beresford M, Sanghera B, Wong WL, Makris A. Imaging of primary breast cancer with 18F-fluorodeoxythymidine PET-CT reveals heterogeneity of proliferation throughout the tumour. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33(5): 624.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-0037-7] [PMID: 16506051]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-0037-7] [PMID: 16506051]
Article Metrics
4