Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer

Pösteki, Gökhan; Güreşin, Alican; Güler, Sertaç Ata; Şimşek, Turgay; Canturk, Nuh Zafer

doi:10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600

Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer

Gökhan Pösteki, (Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Kocaeli, Türkiye)

Alican Güreşin, (Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Kocaeli, Türkiye)

Sertaç Ata Güler, (Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Kocaeli, Türkiye)

Turgay Şimşek, (Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Kocaeli, Türkiye)

Nuh Zafer Cantürk (Kocaeli Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı, Kocaeli, Türkiye)

Turkish Journal of Surgery

0 0

Yıl: 2023 Cilt: 39 Sayı: 4 Sayfa Aralığı: 293 - 299 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600 İndeks Tarihi: 29-12-2023

Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer

Öz:

Objective: The involvement of axillary lymph nodes plays a key role in breast cancer staging. Positron emission tomography is a promising modality for detecting axillary lymph node metastasis. In addition, nomograms are used to predict the status of axillary lymph nodes. In this study, the role of positron emission tomography in determining axillary metastasis and its correlation with the nomogram was evaluated. Material and Methods: The axillary maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) values of the patients in the preoperative period, the features in the perioperative and postoperative specimen and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram data were evaluated. Results: As axillary SUVmax detected by Positron emission tomography in the preoperative period increased, so did the likelihood of lymph node involvement. Axillary SUVmax value were compared with Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram data but no correlation was found. Age, lymph node number, histopathology results, mass diameter, presence or absence of lymphovascular invasion and/or perineural invasion, tumor type, estrogen receptor status, Ki67 and Cerb-B2 statuses were not correlated. However, axillary SUVmax was inversely correlated with grade and progesterone receptor status. Conclusion: Results from positron emission tomography of axillary lymph nodes in breasts cancer patients showed that SUVmax was only inversely related to cancer grade and progesterone receptor status while not correlating with other accepted parameters for tumor assessment. Thus there is insufficient reliability for the use of axillary SUVmax alone for accurate assessment of tumor characteristics at present.

Anahtar Kelime: Axillary metastasis breast cancer positron emission tomography

Meme kanserinin aksiller metastazının belirlenmesinde pozitron emisyon tomografisinin kullanılabilirliği

Öz:

Giriş ve Amaç: Aksiller lenf nodlarının tutulumu meme kanseri evrelemesinde anahtar rol oynar. Pozitron emisyon tomografisi, aksiller lenf nodu metastazını saptamak için umut verici bir yöntemdir. Ek olarak, aksiller lenf nodlarının durumunu tahmin etmek için nomogramlar kullanılır. Bu çalışmada pozitron emisyon tomografisinin aksiller metastaz belirlemedeki rolü ve nomogram ile ilişkisi değerlendirildi. Gereç ve Yöntem: Hastaların preoperatif dönemde aksiller maksimum standart uptake (SUVmax) değerleri, peroperatif ve postoperatif spesimenlerdeki özellikler ve Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram verileri değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Pozitron emisyon tomografisi ile preoperatif dönemde saptanan aksiller SUVmax arttıkça lenf nodu tutulumu olasılığı da arttı. Aksiller SUVmax değeri Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram verileri ile karşılaştırıldı ancak korelasyon bulunamadı. Yaş, lenf nodu sayısı, histopatoloji sonuçları, kütle çapı, lenfovasküler invazyon ve/veya perinöral invazyon varlığı veya yokluğu, tümör tipi, östrojen reseptör durumu, Ki67 ve Cerb2 durumları korele değildi. Bununla birlikte, aksiller SUVmax, tümörün derecesi ve progesteron reseptör durumu ile ters orantılıydı. Sonuç: Meme kanseri hastalarında aksiller lenf nodlarının pozitron emisyon tomografisinden elde edilen sonuçlar, SUVmax’ın kanser derecesi ve progesteron reseptör durumu ile sadece ters orantılı olduğunu ve tümör değerlendirmesi için kabul edilen diğer parametrelerle korele olmadı- ğını gösterdi. Bu nedenle, şu anda tümör özelliklerinin doğru bir şekilde değerlendirilmesi için aksiller SUVmax’ın tek başına kullanımı için yeterli güvenilirlik yoktur.

Anahtar Kelime: Aksiller metastaz meme kanseri pozitron emisyon tomografisi

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Trentham-Dietz A, Newcomb PA, Egan KM, Titus-Ernstoff L, Baron JA, Storer BE, et al. Weight change and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Cancer Causes Control 2000; 11: 533-42. https://doi. org/10.1023/A:1008961931534
2. Houpu Y, Fei X, Yang Y, Fuzhong T, Peng L, Bo Z, et al. Use of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram to guide intraoperative sentinel lymph node frozen sections in patients with early breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 2019; 120(4): 587-92 https://doi.org/10.1002/ jso.25638
3. Liberman L. Clinical management issues in percutaneous core breast biopsy. RCNA 2000; 138: 791-807. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033- 8389(05)70201-3
4. Agnese DM. Advances in breast imaging. Surg Technol Int 2005; 14: 51-6.
5. Boisserie-Lacroix M, Ranchon N. Contribution of high resolution breast ultrasonography in the characterization of ambiguous mammograms. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 2002; 30: 147-53.
6. Further Revisions to Guidance Notes for Ultrasound Scanners used in the Examination of the Breast, with Protocol for Quality Testing. Evaluation Reprt MDA/98/52. London: Medical Devices Agency 1999.
7. Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA. (1995) Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995; 196: 123-34. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.196.1.7784555
8. Tofts PS, Berkowitz B, Schnall MD. Quantitative analysis of dynamic Gd - DTPA enhancement in breast tumours using a permeability model. Magnetic Resonance Imaging 1995; 33: 564-8. https://doi. org/10.1002/mrm.1910330416
9. Rankin S. MRI of the breast. Br Radiol 2000; 73: 806-18. https://doi. org/10.1259/bjr.73.872.11026854
10. Berg W, Gutierrez L, NessAiver M, Carter W, Bhargavan M, Lewis R, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR Imaging in preoperative assessment of Breast Cancer. Radiology 2004; 233: 830-49. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol. 2333031484
11. Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of the breast cancer. Radiology 2001; 220: 13- 30. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.220.1.r01jl3113
12. Hirose M, Hashizume T, Seino N, Kubota H, Nobusawa H, Gokan T. Atlas of breast magnetic resonance imaging. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2007; 36: 51-65. https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2006.10.003
13. Hochman MG, Orel SG, Powell CM, Schnall MD, Reynolds CA, White LN. Fibroadenomas: MR imaging appearances with radiologic-histopathologic correlation. Radiology 1997; 204: 123-9. https://doi. org/10.1148/radiology.204.1.9205233
14. Utech CI, Young CS, Winter PF. Prospective evaluation of fluorine- 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in breast cancer for staging of the axilla related to surgery and immunocytochemistry. Eur J Nucl Med 1996; 23: 1588-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01249621
15. Greco M, Crippa F, Agresti R, Seregni E, Gerali A, Giovanazzi R, et al. Axillary lymph node staging in breast cancer by 2-fluoro-2-deoxy- D-glucose positron emission tomography: Clinical evaluation and alternative management. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93: 630-5. https:// doi.org/10.1093/jnci/93.8.630
16. Nunes LW, Schnall MD, Orel SG, Hochman MG, Langlotz CP, Reynolds CA, et al. Breast MR imaging: Interpretation model. Radiology 1997; 202: 833-41. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.202.3.9051042
17. Liberman L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Tan LK. Ductal enhancement on MR imaging of the breast. AJR 2003; 181: 519-25. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.181.2.1810519
18. Zornoza G, Garcia-Velloso MJ, Sola J, Regueira FM, Pina L, Beorlegui C. 18F-FDG PET complemented with sentinel lymph node biopsy in the detection of axillary involvement in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004; 30: 15-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2003.10.010
19. Puglisi F, Follador A, Minisini AM, Cardellino GG, Russo S, Andreetta C. Baseline staging tests after a new diagnosis of breast cancer: Further evidence of their limited indications. Ann Oncol 2005 16: 263-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdi063
20. Jung NY, Kim SH, Choi BB, Kim SH, Sung MS. Associations between the standardized uptake value of (18) F-FDG PET/CT and the prognostic factors of invasive lobular carcinoma: In comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma. World J Surg Oncol 2015; 13: 113. https:// doi.org/10.1186/s12957-015-0522-9
21. Yoon HJ, Kang KW, Chun IK, Cho N, Im SA, Jeong S, et al. Correlation of breast cancer subtypes, based on estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2, with functional imaging parameters from 68Ga- RGD PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT.Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014: 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2744-4
22. Ulaner GA, Castillo R, Wills J, Gönen M, Goldman DA. 18F-FDG-PET/ CT for systemic staging of patients with newly diagnosed ER-positive and HER2-positive breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44(9): 1420-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3709-1
23. Liu C, Gong C, Liu S, Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Xu X, et al. 18F-FES PET/CT Influences the staging and management of patients with newly diagnosed estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: A retrospective comparative study with 18F-FDG PET/CT. Oncologist 2019; 24(12) :e1277-e85. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0096
24. Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Moretti JL, Porcher R, Espié M, Lehmann-Che J, et al. Correlation of high 18F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38(3): 426-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259- 010-1640-9
25. Ulaner GA, Castillo R, Goldman DA, Wills J, Riedl CC, Pinker-Domenig K, et al. F-FDG-PET/CT for systemic staging of newly diagnosed triple- negative breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43(11): 1937-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3402-9
26. Groheux D, Martineau A, Teixeira L, Espié M, de Cremoux P, Bertheau P, et al. 18FDG-PET/CT for predicting the outcome in ER+/HER2- breast cancer patients: Comparison of clinicopathological parameters and PET image-derived indices including tumor texture analysis. Breast Cancer Res 2017; 19(1): 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-016- 0793-2
27. Ekmekcioglu O, Aliyev A, Yilmaz S, Arslan E, Kaya R, Kocael P, et al. Correlation of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake with histopathological prognostic factors in breast carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 2013; 34(11): 1055-67. https://doi.org/10.1097/ MNM.0b013e3283658369

APA	Pösteki G, Güreşin A, Güler S, Şimşek T, Canturk N (2023). Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. , 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
Chicago	Pösteki Gökhan,Güreşin Alican,Güler Sertaç Ata,Şimşek Turgay,Canturk Nuh Zafer Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. (2023): 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
MLA	Pösteki Gökhan,Güreşin Alican,Güler Sertaç Ata,Şimşek Turgay,Canturk Nuh Zafer Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. , 2023, ss.293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
AMA	Pösteki G,Güreşin A,Güler S,Şimşek T,Canturk N Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. . 2023; 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
Vancouver	Pösteki G,Güreşin A,Güler S,Şimşek T,Canturk N Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. . 2023; 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
IEEE	Pösteki G,Güreşin A,Güler S,Şimşek T,Canturk N "Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer." , ss.293 - 299, 2023. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
ISNAD	Pösteki, Gökhan vd. "Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer". (2023), 293-299. https://doi.org/10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600

APA	Pösteki G, Güreşin A, Güler S, Şimşek T, Canturk N (2023). Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. Turkish Journal of Surgery, 39(4), 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
Chicago	Pösteki Gökhan,Güreşin Alican,Güler Sertaç Ata,Şimşek Turgay,Canturk Nuh Zafer Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. Turkish Journal of Surgery 39, no.4 (2023): 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
MLA	Pösteki Gökhan,Güreşin Alican,Güler Sertaç Ata,Şimşek Turgay,Canturk Nuh Zafer Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. Turkish Journal of Surgery, vol.39, no.4, 2023, ss.293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
AMA	Pösteki G,Güreşin A,Güler S,Şimşek T,Canturk N Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. Turkish Journal of Surgery. 2023; 39(4): 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
Vancouver	Pösteki G,Güreşin A,Güler S,Şimşek T,Canturk N Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer. Turkish Journal of Surgery. 2023; 39(4): 293 - 299. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
IEEE	Pösteki G,Güreşin A,Güler S,Şimşek T,Canturk N "Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer." Turkish Journal of Surgery, 39, ss.293 - 299, 2023. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600
ISNAD	Pösteki, Gökhan vd. "Utility of positron emission tomography for determination of axillary metastasis of breast cancer". Turkish Journal of Surgery 39/4 (2023), 293-299. https://doi.org/10.47717/turkjsurg.2023.5600