Positron-emission Tomography Imaging in Breast Cancer
metastases in patients with breast cancer, Ann Nucl Med, 2005;19(7):573–9.
Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T, et al., Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2005;32(11):1253–8.
Ohta M, Tokuda Y, Suzuki Y, et al., Whole body PET for the evaluation of bony metastases in patients with breast cancer: comparison with 99Tcm-MDP bone scintigraphy, Nucl Med Commun, 2001;22(8):875–9.
Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, et al., Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer, AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2005;184(4):1266–73.
Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ, et al., Comparing whole body [F-18]-2-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99m methylene diphosphonate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer, J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2002;128(6):325–8.
Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Flusser G, et al., Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: initial experience with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18F-fluoride PET and 18F- fluoride PET/CT, J Nucl Med, 2004;45(2):272–8.
Petren-Mallmin M, Andreasson I, Ljunggren O, et al., Skeletal metastases from breast cancer: uptake of 18F-fluoride measured with positron emission tomography in correlation with CT, Skeletal Radiol, 1998;27(2):72–6.
Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Kotzerke J, et al., Early detection and accurate description of extent of metastatic bone disease in breast cancer with fluoride ion and positron emission tomography, J Clin Oncol, 1999;17(8):2381–9.
Antoch G, Saoudi N, Kuehl H, et al., Accuracy of whole-body dual-modality [fluorine-18]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for tumor staging in solid tumors: comparison with CT and PET, J Clin Oncol, 2004;22(21):4357–68.
Tatsumi M CC, Mortzikos KA, Fishman EK, Wahl RL, Initial experience with FDG-PET/CT in the evaluation of breast cancer, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2006;33(3):254–62.
Grahek D, Montravers F, Kerrou K, et al., 18F-FDG in recurrent breast cancer: diagnostic performances, clinical impact and relevance of induced changes in management, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2004;31(2):179–88.
Fueger B, Weber WA, Quon A, et al., Performance of [F-18]-2- fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and integrated PET/CT in restaged breast cancer patients, Mol Imaging Biol, 2005;7:369–76.
97. 98. 99. 100.
Radan L B-HS, Bar-Shalom R, et al, The role of FDG-PET/CT in suspected recurrence of breast cancer, Cancer, 2006;107:2545–51.
Piperkova E, Raphael B, Altinyay ME, et al., Impact of PET/CT in comparison with same day contrast enhanced CT in breast cancer management, Clin Nucl Med, 2007;32(6):429–34.
Veit-Haibach P, Antoch G, Beyer T, et al., FDG-PET/CT in restaging of patients with recurrent breast cancer: possible impact on staging and therapy, Br J Radiol, 2007;80(955):508–15.
Haug AR, Schmidt GP, Klingenstein A, et al., [F-18]-2-fluoro-2- deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the follow-up of breast cancer with elevated levels of tumor markers, J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2007;31(4):629–34.
Dirisamer A, Halpern BS, Flory D, et al., Integrated contrast- enhanced diagnostic whole-body PET/CT as a first-line restaging modality in patients with suspected metastatic recurrence of breast cancer, Eur J Radiol, 2010;73(2):294–9.
Gralow JR, Optimizing the treatment of metastatic breast cancer, Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2005;89(Suppl. 1):S9–15.
103. Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, et al., Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy issues in operable disease, J Clin Oncol, 2008;26(5):814–19.
104. Feldman LD, Hortobagyi GN, Buzdar AU, et al., Pathological
assessment of response to induction chemotherapy in breast cancer, Cancer Res, 1986;46:2578–81.
105. McCready DR, Hortobagyi GN, Kau SW, et al., The prognostic significance of lymph node metastases after preoperative chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer, Arch Surg, 1989;124:21–5.
106. Wolmark N, Wang J, Mamounas E, et al., Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer: nine-year results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18, J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 2001(30):96–102.
107. Moscovic EC, Mansi JL, King DM, et al., Mammography in the assessment of response to medical treatment of large primary breast tumor, Clinical Radiology, 1993;47:339–44.
108. Lee JH, Rosen EL, Mankoff DA, The role of radiotracer imaging in the diagnosis and management of patients with breast cancer: part 2—response to therapy, other indications, and future directions, J Nucl Med, 2009;50(5):738–48.
109. Bassa P, Kim EE, Inoue T, et al., Evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy using PET with [fluorine-18]-fluorodeoxyglucose in breast cancer, J Nucl Med, 1996;37:931–8.
110. Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, Ellis GK, et al., Tumor metabolism and blood flow changes by positron emission tomography: relation to survival in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 2008;26(27):4449–57.
111. Mankoff DA, Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, et al., Changes in blood flow and metabolism in locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, J Nucl Med, 2003;44(11):1806–14.
112. McDermott GM, Welch A, Staff RT, et al., Monitoring primary breast cancer throughout chemotherapy using FDG-PET, Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2007;102(1):75–84.
113. Rousseau C, Devillers A, Sagan C, et al., Monitoring of early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III breast cancer by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, J Clin Oncol, 2006;24(34):5366–72.
Schelling M, Avril N, Nahrig J, et al., Positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 2000;18:1689–95.
115. Smith I, Welch A, Hutcheon A, et al., Positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy, J Clin Oncol, 2000;18:1676–88.
116. Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, et al., Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation, J Clin Oncol, 1993;11:2101–11.
Berriolo-Riedinger A, Touzery C, Riedinger JM, et al., 18F-FDG- PET predicts complete pathological response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2007;34(12):1915–24.
118. Duch J, Fuster D, Munoz M, et al., 18F-FDG PET/CT for early prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2009;36(10):1551–7.
Schwarz-Dose J, Untch M, Tiling R, et al., Monitoring primary systemic therapy of large and locally advanced breast cancer by using sequential positron emission tomography imaging with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, J Clin Oncol, 2009;27(4):535–41.
120. Burcombe RJ, Makris A, Pittam M, et al., Evaluation of good clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in primary breast cancer using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, Eur J Cancer, 2002;38(3):375–9.
Dose-Schwarz J, Tiling R, Avril-Sassen S, et al., Assessment of residual tumour by FDG-PET: conventional imaging and clinical examination following primary chemotherapy of large and locally advanced breast cancer, Br J Cancer, 2010;102(1):35–41.
122. Kim SJ, Kim SK, Lee ES, et al., Predictive value of 18F-FDG PET for pathological response of breast cancer to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, Ann Oncol, 2004;15(9):1352–7.
123. Chen X, Moore MO, Lehman CD, et al., Combined use of MRI and
PET to monitor response and assess residual disease for locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, Acad Radiol, 2004;11(10):1115–24.
124. Emmering J, Krak NC, Van der Hoeven JJ, et al., Preoperative 18F-FDG-PET after chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: prognostic value as compared with histopathology, Ann Oncol, 2008;19:1573–7.
125. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al., New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada, J Natl Cancer Inst, 2000;92(3):205–16.
Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J, RECIST revisited: a review of validation studies on tumour assessment, Eur J Cancer, 2006;42(8):1031–9.
Couturier O, Jerusalem G, N’Guyen JM, et al., Sequential positron emission tomography using [F-18]-fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer, Clin Cancer Res, 2006;12(21):6437–43.
Dose-Schwarz J, Bader M, Jenicke L, et al., Early prediction of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer using sequential 18F-FDG PET, J Nucl Med, 2005;46(7):1144–50.
129. Gennari A, Donati S, Salvadori B, et al., Role of 18F- fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in the early assessment of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients, Clin Breast Cancer, 2000;1(2):156–61, discussion 62–3.
130. Cachin F, Prince HM, Hogg A, et al., Powerful prognostic stratification by [F-18]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with high-dose chemotherapy, J Clin Oncol, 2006;24(19):3026–31.
131. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, et al., Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 2004;22(14):2942–53.
132. Coleman RE, Mashiter G, Whitaker KB, et al., Bone scan flare predicts successful systemic therapy for bone metastases, J Nucl Med, 1988;29(8):1354–9.
133. Schneider JA, Divgi CR, Scott AM, et al., Flare on bone scintigraphy following Taxol chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer, J Nucl Med, 1994;35(11):1748–52.
134. Stafford SE, Gralow JR, Schubert EK, et al., Use of serial FDG PET to measure the response of bone-dominant breast cancer to therapy, Acad Radiol, 2002;9(8):913–21.
Specht JM, Tam SL, Kurland BF, et al., Serial [F-18]-2-fluoro-2- deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) to monitor treatment of bone-dominant metastatic breast cancer predicts time to progression (TTP), Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2007;105(1):87–94.
136. Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, et al., Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT, Radiology, 2008;247(1):189–96.
137. Mankoff DA, Lee JH, Eubank WB, Breast cancer imaging with novel PET tracers, PET Clin, 2009;4(4):371–80.
138. Katzenellenbogen JA, Welch MJ, Dehdashti F, The development of estrogen and progestin radiopharmaceuticals for imaging breast cancer, Anticancer Res, 1997;17:1573–6.
Dehdashti F, Mortimer JE, Siegel BA, et al., Positron tomographic assessment of estrogen receptors in breast cancer: comparison with FDG-PET and in vitro receptor assays, J Nucl Med, 1995;36(10):1766–74.
140. Linden HM, Stekhova SA, Link JM, et al., Quantitative fluoroestradiol positron emission tomography imaging predicts response to endocrine treatment in breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 2006;24(18):2793–9.
Mortimer JE, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, et al., Metabolic flare: indicator of hormone responsiveness in advanced breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 2001;19(11):2797–803.
142. Dijkers EC, Kosterink JG, Rademaker AP, et al., Development and characterization of clinical-grade 89Zr-trastuzumab for HER2/neu immunoPET imaging, J Nucl Med, 2009;50(6):974–81.
US ONCOLOGY & HEMATOLOGY
| Page 2
| Page 3
| Page 4
| Page 5
| Page 6
| Page 7
| Page 8
| Page 9
| Page 10
| Page 11
| Page 12
| Page 13
| Page 14
| Page 15
| Page 16
| Page 17
| Page 18
| Page 19
| Page 20
| Page 21
| Page 22
| Page 23
| Page 24
| Page 25
| Page 26
| Page 27
| Page 28
| Page 29
| Page 30
| Page 31
| Page 32
| Page 33
| Page 34
| Page 35
| Page 36
| Page 37
| Page 38
| Page 39
| Page 40
| Page 41
| Page 42
| Page 43
| Page 44
| Page 45
| Page 46
| Page 47
| Page 48
| Page 49
| Page 50
| Page 51
| Page 52
| Page 53
| Page 54
| Page 55
| Page 56
| Page 57
| Page 58
| Page 59
| Page 60
| Page 61
| Page 62
| Page 63
| Page 64
| Page 65
| Page 66
| Page 67
| Page 68
| Page 69
| Page 70
| Page 71
| Page 72
| Page 73
| Page 74
| Page 75
| Page 76
| Page 77
| Page 78
| Page 79
| Page 80
| Page 81
| Page 82
| Page 83
| Page 84