Can dedicated breast PET help to reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment by differentiating between indolent and potentially aggressive ductal carcinoma in situ?

Evolving Treatment Paradigms for Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Imaging Needs

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a nonobligate precursor to invasive cancer that classically presents as asymptomatic calcifications on screening mammography. The increase in DCIS diagnoses with organized screening programs has raised concerns about overdiagnosis, while a patientcentric push for more personalized care has increased awareness about DCIS overtreatment. The standard of care for most new DCIS diagnoses is surgical excision, but nonsurgical management via active monitoring is gaining attention, and multiple clinical trials are ongoing. Imaging, along with demographic and pathologic information, is a critical component of active monitoring efforts. Commonly used imaging modalities including mammography, ultrasound, and MRI, as well as newer modalities such as contrast-enhanced mammography and dedicated breast PET, can provide prognostic information to risk stratify patients for DCIS active monitoring eligibility. Furthermore, radiologists will be responsible for closely surveilling patients on active monitoring and identifying if invasive progression occurs. Active monitoring is a paradigm shift for DCIS care, but the success or failure will rely heavily on the interpretations and guidance of radiologists.

Clinical Applications of Dedicated Breast Positron Emission Tomography

Breast-specific positron imaging systems provide higher sensitivity than whole-body PET for breast cancer detection. The clinical applications for breast-specific positron imaging are similar to breast MRI including preoperative local staging and neoadjuvant therapy response assessment. Breast-specific positron imaging may be an alternative for patients who cannot undergo breast MRI. Further research is needed in expanding the field-of-view for posterior breast lesions, increasing biopsy capability, and reducing radiation dose. Efforts are also necessary for developing appropriate use criteria, increasing availability, and advancing insurance coverage.

Performance of dedicated breast PET in breast cancer screening: comparison with digital mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis and ultrasound

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic performance of dedicated breast positron emission tomography (dbPET) in breast cancer screening with digital mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DM-DBT) and breast ultrasound (US).

METHODS

Women who participated in opportunistic whole-body PET/computed tomography cancer screening programs with breast examinations using dbPET, DM-DBT, and US between 2016-2020, whose results were determined pathologically or by follow-up for at least 1 year, were included. DbPET, DM-DBT, and US assessments were classified into four diagnostic categories: A (no abnormality), B (mild abnormality), C (need for follow-up), and D (recommend further examination). Category D was defined as screening positive. Each modality's recall rate, sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated per examination to evaluate their diagnostic performance for breast cancer.

RESULTS

Out of 2156 screenings, 18 breast cancer cases were diagnosed during the follow-up period (10 invasive cancers and eight ductal carcinomas in situ [DCIS]). The recall rates for dbPET, DM-DBT, and US were 17.8%, 19.2%, and 9.4%, respectively. The recall rate of dbPET was highest in the first year and subsequently decreased to 11.4%. dbPET, DM-DBT, and US had sensitivities of 72.2%, 88.9%, and 83.3%; specificities of 82.6%, 81.4%, and 91.2%; and PPVs of 3.4%, 3.9%, and 7.4%, respectively. The sensitivities of dbPET, DM-DBT, and US for invasive cancers were 90%, 100%, and 90%, respectively. There were no significant differences between the modalities. One case of dbPET-false-negative invasive cancer was identified in retrospect. DbPET had 50% sensitivity for DCIS, while that of both DM-DBT and US was 75%. Furthermore, the specificity of dbPET in the first year was the lowest among all periods, and modalities increased over the years to 88.7%. The specificity of dbPET was significantly higher than that of DM-DBT (p < 0.01) in the last 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

DbPET had a compatible sensitivity to DM-DBT and breast US for invasive breast cancer. The specificity of dbPET was improved and became higher than that of DM-DBT. DbPET may be a feasible screening modality.

PET-CT in Clinical Adult Oncology: II. Primary Thoracic and Breast Malignancies

Simple Summary

Positron emission tomography (PET), typically combined with computed tomography (CT), has become a critical advanced imaging technique in oncology. With PET-CT, a radioactive molecule (radiotracer) is injected in the bloodstream and localizes to sites of tumor because of specific cellular features of the tumor that accumulate the targeting radiotracer. The CT scan, performed at the same time, provides information to facilitate assessment of the amount of radioactivity from deep or dense structures, and to provide detailed anatomic information. PET-CT has a variety of applications in oncology, including staging, therapeutic response assessment, restaging, and surveillance. This series of six review articles provides an overview of the value, applications, and imaging and interpretive strategies of PET-CT in the more common adult malignancies. The second article in this series addresses the use of PET-CT in breast cancer and other primary thoracic malignancies.

Abstract

Positron emission tomography combined with x-ray computed tomography (PET-CT) is an advanced imaging modality with oncologic applications that include staging, therapy assessment, restaging, and surveillance. This six-part series of review articles provides practical information to providers and imaging professionals regarding the best use of PET-CT for the more common adult malignancies. The second article of this series addresses primary thoracic malignancy and breast cancer. For primary thoracic malignancy, the focus will be on lung cancer, malignant pleural mesothelioma, thymoma, and thymic carcinoma, with an emphasis on the use of FDG PET-CT. For breast cancer, the various histologic subtypes will be addressed, and will include ¹⁸F fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), recently Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved ¹⁸F-fluoroestradiol (FES), and ¹⁸F sodium fluoride (NaF). The pitfalls and nuances of PET-CT in breast and primary thoracic malignancies and the imaging features that distinguish between subcategories of these tumors are addressed. This review will serve as a resource for the appropriate roles and limitations of PET-CT in the clinical management of patients with breast and primary thoracic malignancies for healthcare professionals caring for adult patients with these cancers. It also serves as a practical guide for imaging providers, including radiologists, nuclear medicine physicians, and their trainees.

Physiologic and hypermetabolic breast 18-F FDG uptake on PET/CT during lactation

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the patterns of breast cancer-related and lactation-related ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in breasts of lactating patients with pregnancy-associated breast cancer (PABC) and without breast cancer.

METHODS

¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT datasets of 16 lactating patients with PABC and 16 non-breast cancer lactating patients (controls) were retrospectively evaluated. Uptake was assessed in the tumor and non-affected lactating tissue of the PABC group, and in healthy lactating breasts of the control group, using maximum and mean standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean, respectively), and breast-SUVmax/liver-SUVmean ratio. Statistical tests were used to evaluate differences and correlations between the groups.

RESULTS

Physiological uptake in non-breast cancer lactating patients' breasts was characteristically high regardless of active malignancy status other than breast cancer (SUVmax = 5.0 ± 1.7, n = 32 breasts). Uptake correlated highly between the two breasts (r = 0.61, p = 0.01), but was not correlated with age or lactation duration (p = 0.24 and p = 0.61, respectively). Among PABC patients, the tumors demonstrated high ¹⁸F-FDG uptake (SUVmax = 7.8 ± 7.2, n = 16), which was 326-643% higher than the mostly low physiological FDG uptake observed in the non-affected lactating parenchyma of these patients (SUVmax = 2.1 ± 1.1). Overall, ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in lactating breasts of PABC patients was significantly decreased by 59% (p < 0.0001) compared with that of lactating controls without breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

¹⁸F-FDG uptake in lactating tissue of PABC patients is markedly lower compared with the characteristically high physiological uptake among lactating patients without breast cancer. Consequently, breast tumors visualized by ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in PET/CT were comfortably depicted on top of the background ¹⁸F-FDG uptake in lactating tissue of PABC patients.

KEY POINTS

• FDG uptake in the breast is characteristically high among lactating patients regardless of the presence of an active malignancy other than breast cancer. • FDG uptake in non-affected lactating breast tissue is significantly lower among PABC patients compared with that in lactating women who do not have breast cancer. • In pregnancy-associated breast cancer patients, ¹⁸F-FDG uptake is markedly increased in the breast tumor compared with uptake in the non-affected lactating tissue, enabling its prompt visualization on PET/CT.