Author:
Bruckmann Nils Martin,Sawicki Lino M.,Kirchner Julian,Martin Ole,Umutlu Lale,Herrmann Ken,Fendler Wolfgang,Bittner Ann-Kathrin,Hoffmann Oliver,Mohrmann Svjetlana,Dietzel Frederic,Ingenwerth Marc,Schaarschmidt Benedikt M.,Li Yan,Kowall Bernd,Stang Andreas,Antoch Gerald,Buchbender Christian
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
To evaluate and compare the diagnostic potential of whole-body MRI and whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI for N and M staging in newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer.
Material and methods
A total of 104 patients (age 53.4 ± 12.5) with newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer were enrolled in this study prospectively. All patients underwent a whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI. MRI and 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets were evaluated separately regarding lesion count, lesion localization, and lesion characterization (malignant/benign) as well as the diagnostic confidence (5-point ordinal scale, 1–5). The N and M stages were assessed according to the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual in MRI datasets alone and in 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets, respectively. In the majority of lesions histopathology served as the reference standard. The remaining lesions were followed-up by imaging and clinical examination. Separately for nodal-positive and nodal-negative women, a McNemar chi2 test was performed to compare sensitivity and specificity of the N and M stages between 18F-FDG PET/MRI and MRI. Differences in diagnostic confidence scores were assessed by Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Results
MRI determined the N stage correctly in 78 of 104 (75%) patients with a sensitivity of 62.3% (95% CI: 0.48–0.75), a specificity of 88.2% (95% CI: 0.76–0.96), a PPV (positive predictive value) of 84.6% % (95% CI: 69.5–0.94), and a NPV (negative predictive value) of 69.2% (95% CI: 0.57–0.8). Corresponding results for 18F-FDG PET/MRI were 87/104 (83.7%), 75.5% (95% CI: 0.62–0.86), 92.2% (0.81–0.98), 90% (0.78–0.97), and 78.3% (0.66–0.88), showing a significantly better sensitivity of 18F-FDG PET/MRI determining malignant lymph nodes (p = 0.008). The M stage was identified correctly in MRI and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in 100 of 104 patients (96.2%). Both modalities correctly staged all 7 patients with distant metastases, leading to false-positive findings in 4 patients in each modality (3.8%). In a lesion-based analysis, 18F-FDG PET/MRI showed a significantly better performance in correctly determining malignant lesions (85.8% vs. 67.1%, difference 18.7% (95% CI: 0.13–0.26), p < 0.0001) and offered a superior diagnostic confidence compared with MRI alone (4.1 ± 0.7 vs. 3.4 ± 0.7, p < 0.0001).
Conclusion
18F-FDG PET/MRI has a better diagnostic accuracy for N staging in primary breast cancer patients and provides a significantly higher diagnostic confidence in lesion characterization than MRI alone. But both modalities bear the risk to overestimate the M stage.
Funder
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine,Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging,General Medicine
Reference42 articles.
1. The Global Cancer Observatory G. Breast Cancer. Source: Globocan 2018. World Heal Organ. 2018;876:2018–9.
2. Michaelson JS, Chen LL, Silverstein MJ, Mihm MCJ, Sober AJ, Tanabe KK, et al. How cancer at the primary site and in the lymph nodes contributes to the risk of cancer death. Cancer. 2009;115(21):5095–107.
3. Cardoso F, Senkus E, Costa A, Papadopoulos E, Aapro M, André F, et al. 4th ESO-ESMO international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 4). Ann Oncol. 2018;29(8):1634–57.
4. Wockel A, Festl J, Stuber T, Brust K, Krockenberger M, Heuschmann PU, et al. Interdisciplinary screening, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of breast cancer. Guideline of the DGGG and the DKG (S3-level, AWMF registry number 032/045OL, December 2017) - part 2 with recommendations for the therapy of primary, recurrent and advanced Br. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2018 Nov;78(11):1056–88.
5. NCCN. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology breast cancer, Version 2.2016. NCCN.org. 2016
Cited by
27 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献