Cargando…
Effectiveness of Breast MRI and (18)F-FDG PET/CT for the Preoperative Staging of Invasive Lobular Carcinoma versus Ductal Carcinoma
PURPOSE: We evaluated the utility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) for the preoperative staging of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast and compared the results with those of invasive ductal...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Korean Breast Cancer Society
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4381125/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25834613 http://dx.doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2015.18.1.63 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: We evaluated the utility of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ((18)F-FDG PET/CT) for the preoperative staging of invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) of the breast and compared the results with those of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). METHODS: The study included pathologically proven 32 ILCs and 73 IDCs. We compared clinical and histopathological characteristics and the diagnostic performances of MRI and (18)F-FDG PET/CT for the primary mass, additional ipsilateral and/or contralateral lesion(s), and axillary lymph node metastasis between the ILC and IDC groups. RESULTS: Primary ILCs were greater in size, but demonstrated lower maximum standardized uptake values than IDCs. All primary masses were detected on MRI. The detection rate for ILCs (75.0%) was lower than that for IDCs (83.6%) on (18)F-FDG PET/CT, but the difference was not significant. For additional ipsilateral lesion(s), the sensitivities and specificities of MRI were 87.5% and 58.3% for ILC and 100.0% and 66.7% for IDC, respectively; whereas the sensitivities and specificities of (18)F-FDG PET/CT were 0% and 91.7% for ILC and 37.5% and 94.7% for IDC, respectively. The sensitivity of (18)F-FDG PET/CT for ipsilateral lesion(s) was significantly lower in the ILC group than the IDC group. The sensitivity for ipsilateral lesion(s) was significantly higher with MRI; however, specificity was higher with (18)F-FDG PET/CT in both tumor groups. There was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance for additional contralateral lesion(s) or axillary lymph node metastasis on MRI or (18)F-FDG PET/CT for ILC versus IDC. CONCLUSION: The MRI and (18)F-FDG PET/CT detection rates for the primary cancer do not differ between the ILC and IDC groups. Although (18)F-FDG PET/CT demonstrates lower sensitivity for primary and additional ipsilateral lesions, it shows higher specificity for additional ipsilateral lesions, and could play a complementary role in the staging of ILC as well as IDC. |
---|