© 2001 by Oxford University Press
Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 93, No. 8, 630-635,
April 18, 2001
© 2001 Oxford University Press
REPORT |
Axillary Lymph Node Staging in Breast Cancer by 2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose–Positron Emission Tomography: Clinical Evaluation and Alternative Management
Affiliations of authors: M. Greco, R. Agresti, R. Giovanazzi, S. Asero, C. Ferraris, M. Gennaro (General Surgery B—Breast Unit), F. Crippa, E. Seregni, A. Gerali, E. Bombardieri (Nuclear Medicine Unit), A. Micheli (Epidemiology Unit), N. Cascinelli (Scientific Director), National Cancer Institute, Milan, Italy.
Correspondence to: Marco Greco, M.D., General Surgery B—Breast Unit, National Cancer Institute, Via Venezian 1, 20133 Milan, Italy (e-mail: r.agresti{at}iol.it).
Background: Surgical removal of axillary lymph node and histologic examination for metastases are used to determine whether adjuvant treatment is necessary for patients with breast cancer. Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is a costly procedure associated with various side effects, and 80% or more of patients with tumors of 20 mm or less are lymph node negative and might avoid ALND. In this study, we evaluated whether an alternative, noninvasive method—i.e., positron emission tomography (PET) with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG)— could be used to determine axillary lymph node status in patients with breast cancer. Methods: One hundred sixty-seven consecutive patients with breast cancers of 50 mm or less (range = 5–50 mm; mean = 21 mm) scheduled for complete ALND were studied preoperatively with FDG–PET, and then PET and pathology results from ALND were compared. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of lymph node staging with PET were 94.4% (PET detected 68 of 72 patients with axillary involvement; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 86.0% to 98.2%), 86.3% (82 of 95 patients without axillary involvement; 95% CI = 77.8% to 91.9%), and 89.8% (150 of 167 patients with breast cancer; 95% CI = 84.2% to 93.6%), respectively. Positive- and negative-predictive values were 84.0% (68 patients with histologically positive lymph nodes of 81 patients with positive FDG–PET scan; 95% CI = 74.2% to 90.5%) and 95.3% (82 patients with histologically negative lymph nodes of 86 patients with negative FDG–PET scan; 95% CI = 88.2% to 98.5%), respectively. When PET results for axillary metastasis were analyzed by tumor size, the diagnostic accuracy was similar for all groups (86.0%–94.2%), with higher sensitivity for tumors of 21–50 mm (98.0%) and higher specificity for tumors of 10 mm or less (87.8%), and the range was 93.5%–97.3% for negative-predictive values and 54.5%–94.1% for positive-predictive values. Among the 72 patients with axillary involvement, PET detected three or fewer metastatic lymph nodes in 27 (37.5%) patients, about 80% of whom had no clinically palpable axillary lymph nodes. Conclusions: Noninvasive FDG–PET appears to be an accurate technique to predict axillary status in patients with breast cancer and thus to identify patients who might avoid ALND. These results should be confirmed in large multicenter studies.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  B. J. Chae, J. S. Bae, B. J. Kang, S. H. Kim, S. S. Jung, and B. J. Song Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography in the Detection of Axillary Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients with Early Stage Breast Cancer Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2009; 39(5): 284 - 289. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Taira, S. Ohsumi, D. Takabatake, F. Hara, S. Takashima, K. Aogi, S. Takashima, T. Inoue, S. Sugata, and R. Nishimura Determination of Indication for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Clinical Node-negative Breast Cancer Using Preoperative 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Fusion Imaging Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., January 1, 2009; 39(1): 16 - 21. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. C. Hodgson and K. Y. Gulenchyn Is There a Role for Positron Emission Tomography in Breast Cancer Staging? J. Clin. Oncol., February 10, 2008; 26(5): 712 - 720. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. S. Lim, W. Yoon, T. W. Chung, J. K. Kim, J. G. Park, H. K. Kang, H. S. Bom, and J. H. Yoon FDG PET/CT for the Detection and Evaluation of Breast Diseases: Usefulness and Limitations RadioGraphics, October 1, 2007; 27(suppl_1): S197 - S213. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 U Veronesi, C De Cicco, V. Galimberti, J. Fernandez, N Rotmensz, G Viale, G Spano, A Luini, M Intra, P Veronesi, et al. A comparative study on the value of FDG-PET and sentinel node biopsy to identify occult axillary metastases Ann. Onc., March 1, 2007; 18(3): 473 - 478. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. M. Blodgett, C. C. Meltzer, and D. W. Townsend PET/CT: Form and Function Radiology, February 1, 2007; 242(2): 360 - 385. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Chung, D. Liou, S. Karlan, A. Waxman, K. Fujimoto, M. Hagiike, and E. H. Phillips Preoperative FDG-PET for Axillary Metastases in Patients With Breast Cancer Arch Surg, August 1, 2006; 141(8): 783 - 789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. J. Kelloff, J. M. Hoffman, B. Johnson, H. I. Scher, B. A. Siegel, E. Y. Cheng, B. D. Cheson, J. O'Shaughnessy, K. Z. Guyton, D. A. Mankoff, et al. Progress and Promise of FDG-PET Imaging for Cancer Patient Management and Oncologic Drug Development Clin. Cancer Res., April 15, 2005; 11(8): 2785 - 2808. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Quon and S. S. Gambhir FDG-PET and Beyond: Molecular Breast Cancer Imaging J. Clin. Oncol., March 10, 2005; 23(8): 1664 - 1673. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Torabi, S. L. Aquino, and M. G. Harisinghani Current Concepts in Lymph Node Imaging J. Nucl. Med., September 1, 2004; 45(9): 1509 - 1518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. J.M. van der Hoeven, N. C. Krak, O. S. Hoekstra, E. F.I. Comans, R. P.A. Boom, D. van Geldere, S. Meijer, E. van der Wall, J. Buter, H. M. Pinedo, et al. 18F-2-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose Positron Emission Tomography in Staging of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2004; 22(7): 1253 - 1259. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Wahl, B. A. Siegel, R. E. Coleman, and C. G. Gatsonis Prospective Multicenter Study of Axillary Nodal Staging by Positron Emission Tomography in Breast Cancer: A Report of the Staging Breast Cancer With PET Study Group J. Clin. Oncol., January 15, 2004; 22(2): 277 - 285. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 U. Guller, E. Nitzsche, H. Moch, and M. Zuber Is Positron Emission Tomography an Accurate Non-invasive Alternative to Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer Patients? J Natl Cancer Inst, July 16, 2003; 95(14): 1040 - 1043. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G S Mijnhout, O S Hoekstra, A van Lingen, P J van Diest, H J Ader, A A Lammertsma, R Pijpers, S Meijer, and G J J Teule How morphometric analysis of metastatic load predicts the (un)usefulness of PET scanning: the case of lymph node staging in melanoma J. Clin. Pathol., April 1, 2003; 56(4): 283 - 286. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Koizumi, M. Makita, M. Yoshimoto, F. Kasumi, G. Sakamoto, and E. Ogata Indications for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Patients with Breast Cancer: Retrospective and Simulation Analyses Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., December 1, 2002; 32(12): 517 - 524. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Torrenga, J. Licht, J. J. M. van der Hoeven, O. S. Hoekstra, S. Meijer, and P. J. van Diest Re: 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, November 7, 2001; 93(21): 1659 - 1660. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Greco, M. Gennaro, and C. Ferraris RESPONSE: Re: 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, November 7, 2001; 93(21): 1660 - 1661. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|