Cargando…

Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives

The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT and breast MRI for primary breast cancer (BC) response assessment after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and to evaluate future perspectives in this setting. We performed a critical review using three...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Caracciolo, Matteo, Castello, Angelo, Urso, Luca, Borgia, Francesca, Marzola, Maria Cristina, Uccelli, Licia, Cittanti, Corrado, Bartolomei, Mirco, Castellani, Massimo, Lopci, Egesta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10455346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37629397
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165355
_version_ 1785096429758316544
author Caracciolo, Matteo
Castello, Angelo
Urso, Luca
Borgia, Francesca
Marzola, Maria Cristina
Uccelli, Licia
Cittanti, Corrado
Bartolomei, Mirco
Castellani, Massimo
Lopci, Egesta
author_facet Caracciolo, Matteo
Castello, Angelo
Urso, Luca
Borgia, Francesca
Marzola, Maria Cristina
Uccelli, Licia
Cittanti, Corrado
Bartolomei, Mirco
Castellani, Massimo
Lopci, Egesta
author_sort Caracciolo, Matteo
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT and breast MRI for primary breast cancer (BC) response assessment after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and to evaluate future perspectives in this setting. We performed a critical review using three bibliographic databases (i.e., PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) for articles published up to the 6 June 2023, starting from 2012. The Quality Assessment of Diagnosis Accuracy Study (QUADAS-2) tool was adopted to evaluate the risk of bias. A total of 76 studies were identified and screened, while 14 articles were included in our systematic review after a full-text assessment. The total number of patients included was 842. Eight out of fourteen studies (57.1%) were prospective, while all except one study were conducted in a single center. In the majority of the included studies (71.4%), 3.0 Tesla (T) MRI scans were adopted. Three out of fourteen studies (21.4%) used both 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI and only two used 1.5 T. [(18)F]FDG was the radiotracer used in every study included. All patients accepted surgical treatment after NAC and each study used pathological complete response (pCR) as the reference standard. Some of the studies have demonstrated the superiority of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT, while others proved that MRI was superior to PET/CT. Recent studies indicate that PET/CT has a better specificity, while MRI has a superior sensitivity for assessing pCR in BC patients after NAC. The complementary value of the combined use of these modalities represents probably the most important tool to improve diagnostic performance in this setting. Overall, larger prospective studies, possibly randomized, are needed, hopefully evaluating PET/MR and allowing for new tools, such as radiomic parameters, to find a proper place in the setting of BC patients undergoing NAC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10455346
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104553462023-08-26 Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives Caracciolo, Matteo Castello, Angelo Urso, Luca Borgia, Francesca Marzola, Maria Cristina Uccelli, Licia Cittanti, Corrado Bartolomei, Mirco Castellani, Massimo Lopci, Egesta J Clin Med Review The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT and breast MRI for primary breast cancer (BC) response assessment after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and to evaluate future perspectives in this setting. We performed a critical review using three bibliographic databases (i.e., PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) for articles published up to the 6 June 2023, starting from 2012. The Quality Assessment of Diagnosis Accuracy Study (QUADAS-2) tool was adopted to evaluate the risk of bias. A total of 76 studies were identified and screened, while 14 articles were included in our systematic review after a full-text assessment. The total number of patients included was 842. Eight out of fourteen studies (57.1%) were prospective, while all except one study were conducted in a single center. In the majority of the included studies (71.4%), 3.0 Tesla (T) MRI scans were adopted. Three out of fourteen studies (21.4%) used both 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI and only two used 1.5 T. [(18)F]FDG was the radiotracer used in every study included. All patients accepted surgical treatment after NAC and each study used pathological complete response (pCR) as the reference standard. Some of the studies have demonstrated the superiority of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT, while others proved that MRI was superior to PET/CT. Recent studies indicate that PET/CT has a better specificity, while MRI has a superior sensitivity for assessing pCR in BC patients after NAC. The complementary value of the combined use of these modalities represents probably the most important tool to improve diagnostic performance in this setting. Overall, larger prospective studies, possibly randomized, are needed, hopefully evaluating PET/MR and allowing for new tools, such as radiomic parameters, to find a proper place in the setting of BC patients undergoing NAC. MDPI 2023-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10455346/ /pubmed/37629397 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165355 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Caracciolo, Matteo
Castello, Angelo
Urso, Luca
Borgia, Francesca
Marzola, Maria Cristina
Uccelli, Licia
Cittanti, Corrado
Bartolomei, Mirco
Castellani, Massimo
Lopci, Egesta
Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives
title Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives
title_full Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives
title_fullStr Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives
title_short Comparison of MRI vs. [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Evaluation of Primary Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Literature Review and Future Perspectives
title_sort comparison of mri vs. [(18)f]fdg pet/ct for treatment response evaluation of primary breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: literature review and future perspectives
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10455346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37629397
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12165355
work_keys_str_mv AT caracciolomatteo comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT castelloangelo comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT ursoluca comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT borgiafrancesca comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT marzolamariacristina comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT uccellilicia comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT cittanticorrado comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT bartolomeimirco comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT castellanimassimo comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives
AT lopciegesta comparisonofmrivs18ffdgpetctfortreatmentresponseevaluationofprimarybreastcancerafterneoadjuvantchemotherapyliteraturereviewandfutureperspectives