Positron emission tomography in breast cancer

被引:3
|
作者
Schirrmeister, H
Kreienberg, R
Reske, SN
Kühn, T
机构
[1] Univ Ulm, Abt Nukl Med, D-89069 Ulm, Germany
[2] Univ Ulm, Abt Gynakol, D-89069 Ulm, Germany
关键词
D O I
10.1055/s-2001-15430
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Positron emission tomography (PET) is a relatively new approach that enables detection of malignant tumours by visualisation of their enhanced glucose metabolism. Performance of whole-body imaging is one of the favourable features of PET. The sensitivity and specificity in detecting breast cancer and in differentiating breast cancer from benign tumours have been reported to be 68 - 94% and 97 - 75%, respectively. In a recent study, performed in our institution, PET was twofold more sensitive in detecting multifocal lesions than the combination of ultrasonography and mammography, whereas the specificity was comparable. Currently, PET ist the most sensitive non-invasive imaging modality in detecting axillary (sensitivity 79%) and internal lymph node metastases. Furthermore, accuracy in detecting distant metastases is comparable to that of the combination of x-ray, ultrasonography of the liver and bone scintigraphy. Because of its unique capability to visualise tumour metabolism directly, PET seems to be optimal for therapy control. PET cannot replace histological examination of the primary tumour and of the axillary lymph nodes. Evaluation of the internal lymph nodes, therapy control and whole-body screening in patients with increased tumour marker serum levels are indications for efficient PET imaging in breast cancer.
引用
收藏
页码:351 / 354
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Imaging mouse models of breast cancer with positron emission tomography
    S Cherry
    C Abbey
    S Borowsky
    J Gregg
    R Cardiff
    Breast Cancer Research, 5 (Suppl 1)
  • [22] FDG (18 fluorodeoxyglucose) : Positron emission tomography and breast cancer
    Menkès, MCJ
    Milhaud, MG
    Paolaggi, MJB
    de Gennes, MJL
    Picard, MJD
    Boulu, MR
    Nordmann, MR
    BULLETIN DE L ACADEMIE NATIONALE DE MEDECINE, 2005, 189 (05): : 975 - 978
  • [23] Cost-Effectiveness of Positron Emission Tomography in Breast Cancer
    J. Scott Sloka
    Peter D. Hollett
    Maria Mathews
    Molecular Imaging and Biology, 2005, 7 : 351 - 360
  • [24] The role of positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a short review
    Marino M.A.
    Helbich T.H.
    Blandino A.
    Pinker K.
    memo - Magazine of European Medical Oncology, 2015, 8 (2) : 130 - 135
  • [25] Detection of Bone Metastases in Breast Cancer by Positron Emission Tomography
    Schirrmeister, Holger
    PET CLINICS, 2006, 1 (01) : 25 - 32
  • [26] Positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a clinicopathological correlation of results
    Rostom, AY
    Powe, J
    Kandil, A
    Ezzat, A
    Bakheet, S
    El-Khwsky, F
    El-Hussainy, G
    Sorbris, R
    Sjoklint, O
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1999, 72 (863): : 1064 - 1068
  • [27] Positron Emission Tomography (PET) and breast cancer in clinical practice
    Lavayssiere, Robert
    Cabee, Anne-Elizabeth
    Filmont, Jean-Emmanuel
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2009, 69 (01) : 50 - 58
  • [28] Flare phenomenon in positron emission tomography in a case of breast cancer-a pitfall of positron emission tomography imaging interpretation
    Tu, Dom-Gene
    Yao, Wei-Jen
    Chang, Tsai-Wang
    Chiu, Nan-Tsing
    Chen, Yi-Hsun
    CLINICAL IMAGING, 2009, 33 (06) : 468 - 470
  • [29] An economic evaluation of positron emission tomography (PET) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the diagnosis of breast cancer recurrence
    Auguste, P.
    Barton, P.
    Hyde, C.
    Roberts, T. E.
    HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2011, 15 (18) : 1 - +
  • [30] A systematic review of positron emission tomography (PET) and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the diagnosis of breast cancer recurrence
    Pennant, M.
    Takwoingi, Y.
    Pennant, L.
    Davenport, C.
    Fry-Smith, A.
    Eisinga, A.
    Andronis, L.
    Arvanitis, T.
    Deeks, J.
    Hyde, C.
    HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, 2010, 14 (50) : 1 - +