Diagnostic Performance of [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET in Staging Grade 1–2, Estrogen Receptor Positive Breast Cancer
Ramsha Iqbal,
Lemonitsa H. Mammatas,
Tuba Aras,
Wouter V. Vogel,
Tim van de Brug,
Daniela E. Oprea-Lager,
Henk M. W. Verheul,
Otto S. Hoekstra,
Ronald Boellaard,
Catharina W. Menke-van der Houven van Oordt
Affiliations
Ramsha Iqbal
Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Lemonitsa H. Mammatas
Department of Medical Oncology, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, 2625 AD Delft, The Netherlands
Tuba Aras
Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Wouter V. Vogel
Department of Nuclear Medicine and Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute—Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tim van de Brug
Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Daniela E. Oprea-Lager
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Henk M. W. Verheul
Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525 GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Otto S. Hoekstra
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Ronald Boellaard
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Catharina W. Menke-van der Houven van Oordt
Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Positron emission tomography using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG PET) potentially underperforms for staging of patients with grade 1–2 estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. The aim of this study was to retrospectively investigate the diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET in this patient population. Suspect tumor lesions detected on conventional imaging and FDG PET were confirmed with pathology or follow up. PET-positive lesions were (semi)quantified with standardized uptake values (SUV) and these were correlated with various pathological features, including the histological subtype. Pre-operative imaging detected 155 pathologically verified lesions (in 74 patients). A total of 115/155 (74.2%) lesions identified on FDG PET were classified as true positive, i.e., malignant (in 67 patients) and 17/155 (10.8%) lesions as false positive, i.e., benign (in 9 patients); 7/155 (4.5%) as false negative (in 7 patients) and 16/155 (10.3%) as true negative (in 14 patients). FDG PET incorrectly staged 16/70 (22.9%) patients. The FDG uptake correlated with histological subtype, showing higher uptake in ductal carcinoma, compared to lobular carcinoma (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Within this study, FDG PET inadequately staged 22.9% of grade 1–2, ER + BC cases. Incorrect staging can lead to inappropriate treatment choices, potentially affecting survival and quality of life. Prospective studies investigating novel radiotracers are urgently needed.