Cargando…

Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study

PURPOSE: Correct identification of tumour receptor status is important for treatment decisions in breast cancer. [(18)F]FES PET and [(18)F]FDHT PET allow non-invasive assessment of the oestrogen (ER) and androgen receptor (AR) status of individual lesions within a patient. Despite standardised analy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mammatas, Lemonitsa H., Venema, Clasina M., Schröder, Carolina P., de Vet, Henrica C. W., van Kruchten, Michel, Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M., Yaqub, Maqsood M., Verheul, Henk M. W., Boven, Epie, van der Vegt, Bert, de Vries, Erik F. J., de Vries, Elisabeth G. E., Hoekstra, Otto S., Hospers, Geke A. P., der Houven van Oordt, C. Willemien Menke-van
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7167394/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32307594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13550-020-00627-z
_version_ 1783523563385389056
author Mammatas, Lemonitsa H.
Venema, Clasina M.
Schröder, Carolina P.
de Vet, Henrica C. W.
van Kruchten, Michel
Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M.
Yaqub, Maqsood M.
Verheul, Henk M. W.
Boven, Epie
van der Vegt, Bert
de Vries, Erik F. J.
de Vries, Elisabeth G. E.
Hoekstra, Otto S.
Hospers, Geke A. P.
der Houven van Oordt, C. Willemien Menke-van
author_facet Mammatas, Lemonitsa H.
Venema, Clasina M.
Schröder, Carolina P.
de Vet, Henrica C. W.
van Kruchten, Michel
Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M.
Yaqub, Maqsood M.
Verheul, Henk M. W.
Boven, Epie
van der Vegt, Bert
de Vries, Erik F. J.
de Vries, Elisabeth G. E.
Hoekstra, Otto S.
Hospers, Geke A. P.
der Houven van Oordt, C. Willemien Menke-van
author_sort Mammatas, Lemonitsa H.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Correct identification of tumour receptor status is important for treatment decisions in breast cancer. [(18)F]FES PET and [(18)F]FDHT PET allow non-invasive assessment of the oestrogen (ER) and androgen receptor (AR) status of individual lesions within a patient. Despite standardised analysis techniques, interobserver variability can significantly affect the interpretation of PET results and thus clinical applicability. The purpose of this study was to determine visual and quantitative interobserver variability of [(18)F]FES PET and [(18)F]FDHT PET interpretation in patients with metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: In this prospective, two-centre study, patients with ER-positive metastatic breast cancer underwent both [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET/CT. In total, 120 lesions were identified in 10 patients with either conventional imaging (bone scan or lesions > 1 cm on high-resolution CT, n = 69) or only with [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET (n = 51). All lesions were scored visually and quantitatively by two independent observers. A visually PET-positive lesion was defined as uptake above background. For quantification, we used standardised uptake values (SUV): SUV(max), SUV(peak) and SUV(mean). RESULTS: Visual analysis showed an absolute positive and negative interobserver agreement for [(18)F]FES PET of 84% and 83%, respectively (kappa = 0.67, 95% CI 0.48–0.87), and 49% and 74% for [(18)F]FDHT PET, respectively (kappa = 0.23, 95% CI − 0.04–0.49). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for quantification of SUV(max), SUV(peak) and SUV(mean) were 0.98 (95% CI 0.96–0.98), 0.97 (95% CI 0.96–0.98) and 0.89 (95% CI 0.83–0.92) for [(18)F]FES, and 0.78 (95% CI 0.66–0.85), 0.76 (95% CI 0.63–0.84) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.62–0.84) for [(18)F]FDHT, respectively. CONCLUSION: Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES PET showed high interobserver agreement. These results support the use of [(18)F]FES PET in clinical practice. In contrast, visual agreement for [(18)F]FDHT PET was relatively low due to low tumour-background ratios, but quantitative agreement was good. This underscores the relevance of quantitative analysis of [(18)F]FDHT PET in breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01988324. Registered 20 November 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01988324?term=FDHT+PET&draw=1&rank=2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7167394
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71673942020-04-23 Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study Mammatas, Lemonitsa H. Venema, Clasina M. Schröder, Carolina P. de Vet, Henrica C. W. van Kruchten, Michel Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M. Yaqub, Maqsood M. Verheul, Henk M. W. Boven, Epie van der Vegt, Bert de Vries, Erik F. J. de Vries, Elisabeth G. E. Hoekstra, Otto S. Hospers, Geke A. P. der Houven van Oordt, C. Willemien Menke-van EJNMMI Res Original Research PURPOSE: Correct identification of tumour receptor status is important for treatment decisions in breast cancer. [(18)F]FES PET and [(18)F]FDHT PET allow non-invasive assessment of the oestrogen (ER) and androgen receptor (AR) status of individual lesions within a patient. Despite standardised analysis techniques, interobserver variability can significantly affect the interpretation of PET results and thus clinical applicability. The purpose of this study was to determine visual and quantitative interobserver variability of [(18)F]FES PET and [(18)F]FDHT PET interpretation in patients with metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: In this prospective, two-centre study, patients with ER-positive metastatic breast cancer underwent both [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET/CT. In total, 120 lesions were identified in 10 patients with either conventional imaging (bone scan or lesions > 1 cm on high-resolution CT, n = 69) or only with [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET (n = 51). All lesions were scored visually and quantitatively by two independent observers. A visually PET-positive lesion was defined as uptake above background. For quantification, we used standardised uptake values (SUV): SUV(max), SUV(peak) and SUV(mean). RESULTS: Visual analysis showed an absolute positive and negative interobserver agreement for [(18)F]FES PET of 84% and 83%, respectively (kappa = 0.67, 95% CI 0.48–0.87), and 49% and 74% for [(18)F]FDHT PET, respectively (kappa = 0.23, 95% CI − 0.04–0.49). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for quantification of SUV(max), SUV(peak) and SUV(mean) were 0.98 (95% CI 0.96–0.98), 0.97 (95% CI 0.96–0.98) and 0.89 (95% CI 0.83–0.92) for [(18)F]FES, and 0.78 (95% CI 0.66–0.85), 0.76 (95% CI 0.63–0.84) and 0.75 (95% CI 0.62–0.84) for [(18)F]FDHT, respectively. CONCLUSION: Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES PET showed high interobserver agreement. These results support the use of [(18)F]FES PET in clinical practice. In contrast, visual agreement for [(18)F]FDHT PET was relatively low due to low tumour-background ratios, but quantitative agreement was good. This underscores the relevance of quantitative analysis of [(18)F]FDHT PET in breast cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01988324. Registered 20 November 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01988324?term=FDHT+PET&draw=1&rank=2. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7167394/ /pubmed/32307594 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13550-020-00627-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Research
Mammatas, Lemonitsa H.
Venema, Clasina M.
Schröder, Carolina P.
de Vet, Henrica C. W.
van Kruchten, Michel
Glaudemans, Andor W. J. M.
Yaqub, Maqsood M.
Verheul, Henk M. W.
Boven, Epie
van der Vegt, Bert
de Vries, Erik F. J.
de Vries, Elisabeth G. E.
Hoekstra, Otto S.
Hospers, Geke A. P.
der Houven van Oordt, C. Willemien Menke-van
Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study
title Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study
title_full Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study
title_fullStr Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study
title_full_unstemmed Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study
title_short Visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)F]FES and [(18)F]FDHT PET in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study
title_sort visual and quantitative evaluation of [(18)f]fes and [(18)f]fdht pet in patients with metastatic breast cancer: an interobserver variability study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7167394/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32307594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13550-020-00627-z
work_keys_str_mv AT mammataslemonitsah visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT venemaclasinam visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT schrodercarolinap visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT devethenricacw visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT vankruchtenmichel visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT glaudemansandorwjm visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT yaqubmaqsoodm visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT verheulhenkmw visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT bovenepie visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT vandervegtbert visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT devrieserikfj visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT devrieselisabethge visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT hoekstraottos visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT hospersgekeap visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy
AT derhouvenvanoordtcwillemienmenkevan visualandquantitativeevaluationof18ffesand18ffdhtpetinpatientswithmetastaticbreastcanceraninterobservervariabilitystudy