Breast pet ct protocol-PET scan for breast cancer: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia

Scinti scans are also frequently used. Check it out! This is where the doctors try to figure out which other tests, such as biopsies , might be necessary. So, in many cases, PET scans are useful as a means of reassurance that a biopsy was not in fact necessary. Of course, once there is an official confirmation of a breast cancer diagnosis the staging process begins.

Breast pet ct protocol

Breast pet ct protocol

The application of an oral contrast agent will aid in the differentiation of mesenteric lymph nodes from adjacent small-bowel Blow job streaming videos. This tracer is given through a vein IVusually on the inside of your elbow. Breast pet ct protocol for publication Not applicable. SLN biopsy provides accurate staging information while cct the morbidity of a complete axillary lymph node dissection. Inclusion of the brain to stage potential cerebral metastases may be desired. However, due to the high heterogeneity of breast cancers, FDG tumour uptake intensity measured as maximum standardised uptake value SUV max is highly variable, depending on multiple factors such as histological type, phenotypic type [ 5 ], proliferation index [ 6 ], histological grade and the presence of a P53 mutation [ 7 ] for example. You must be logged in to post a comment.

Bears sucking cubs. DEFINING DIAGNOSTIC CT

In radiology, low-dose CT is widely used as a tool for lung cancer screening. Support Center Support Center. CT allows not only attenuation correction but also the visualisation of morphological and anatomical structures with a high spatial resolution. Multidisciplinary team meetings : Multidisciplinary team meetings allow a team approach to patient management to take into account and evaluate all aspects Breast pet ct protocol the disease prior to individualised therapy planning. CT depicts changes in tissue attenuation measured in Hounsfield units HU. Moreover, consistency in numerical values between platforms and institutes that acquire the data will potentially enhance the role of Hot girls getting fucked in hotel and quantitative image interpretation. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. This can be achieved by modifying the CT scan direction from craniocaudal to Breast pet ct protocol and adjusting the phasing and timing of the contrast material injection 5. Accessed 23 Nov If no comparison studies are available, a statement should be made to that effect.

A breast positron emission tomography PET scan is an imaging test that uses a radioactive substance called a tracer to look for breast cancer.

  • Stage-adapted treatment in oncology relies on correct tumor staging for patients with malignant diseases.
  • Repeatability relates to the uncertainty in obtaining the same result in the same patient when he or she is examined more than once on the same system.
  • The procedure standards help to identify those elements of the procedure that are most important in obtaining a high-quality examination, while simultaneously controlling costs.
  • .

  • .

Scinti scans are also frequently used. Check it out! This is where the doctors try to figure out which other tests, such as biopsies , might be necessary. So, in many cases, PET scans are useful as a means of reassurance that a biopsy was not in fact necessary. Of course, once there is an official confirmation of a breast cancer diagnosis the staging process begins. Indeed, one of the most essential aspects of the staging process is to determine whether or not the breast cancer has spread to the axillary lymph nodes.

Medics will commonly recommend a PET scan for this purpose. Many oncologists, in fact, will take a positive PET scan of the axillary region as evidence of metastasis, and not even go ahead with axillary dissections removing axillary lymph nodes for biopsy assessment.

So, the main argument in favor of using breast PET scans in the screening process is to avoid the use of invasive procedures.

While PET breast cancer screening has its proponents, the general consensus is that this particular modality is most useful in the staging and re-staging, where there is recurrence of breast cancer. In addition, the PET scan is also useful in monitoring the effectiveness and response to treatments, especially chemotherapy. Women who have completed treatment, but remain at high risk for recurrence, might also be good candidates for follow-up PET screening.

The use of PET scans to rule out axillary node metastasis of breast cancer is now widely in use. With research paying a lot of attention to the specific genetic and molecular properties of various types and presentations of breast cancer, we could see the use of PET emerge more strongly as part of the screening process.

Since PET technology monitors metabolic processes at the molecular level, a fine-tuning of the process using dyes engineered to react only to particular molecular characteristics may be able to give a clearer identification of given breast cancer. A PET scan can also assist in predicting cancer behaviour and to help in tailoring the most effective treatment. Essentially, this technique uses a modified technical apparatus with detectors arranged around the smaller size of the breast and employs a higher resolution.

It is unlikely that PEM will gain broad acceptance unless it can be shown to reduce costs and give additional time saving and life-saving information, not available to the other modalities. PET stands for Positron Emission Tomography and is an imaging test that allows doctors to check for disease in your body. The scan uses radioactive tracers in a special dye. Specialist radiologists inject these tracers into a vein in your arm. The organs and tissue of the body absorb the radioactive dye.

Once the PET scanner highlights these tracers the doctor can see how well your organs and tissues are working. A PET scan is typically an outpatient procedure, meaning that you will be able to go about your day after the test is complete. Your doctor may order a PET scan to inspect the blood flow, oxygen intake and metabolism of your organs and tissues. Medics may order PET scans to detect The PET scan provides your doctor with the best view of complex systemic diseases such as coronary artery disease, brain tumors, memory disorders, and seizures.

When used to detect cancer, the test allows doctors to see how cancer metabolizes, how it may spread and how well treatments are working. While the scan does involve radioactive tracers, the exposure to harmful radiation is minimal.

Radiation levels are too low to affect the normal processes of the body. The risks of the test are minimal in comparison to the beneficial results of diagnosing serious medical conditions. However, the radiation may be unsafe for developing fetuses, so women who are pregnant, think they might be pregnant, or are nursing should not undergo a PET scan. Other risks of the test include feelings of discomfort if you are claustrophobic or are uncomfortable with needles.

Before the scan, medics administer the tracers through an IV in your arm, through a solution you drink, or in a gas you inhale. Your body needs time to absorb the tracers, so you will wait about an hour before the scan begins.

Next, you will undergo the scan. This involves lying on a narrow table attached to the PET machine, which looks like a giant toilet paper roll. The table glides slowly into the machine so that the scan can be conducted.

You will need to lie still during the scan, and the technician will tell you when you need to remain still. The technician may ask you to hold your breath for short periods.

You will hear buzzing and clicking noises during the test. When all the necessary images have been recorded, you will slide out of the machine.

The test is then complete. After the test, you will be free to go about your day, unless your doctor gives you other instructions. Drink plenty of fluids after the test to help flush the tracers out of your system. Generally, all tracers will have left your body in two days. Meanwhile, a trained specialist will interpret the PET images and share the information with your doctor.

Your doctor will then go over the results with you at a follow-up appointment.

Give the patient extra blankets if necessary. A generally applicable protocol is outlined below. Alberts S, Poston GJ. Consult the local service engineer when needed. Ann ICRP.

Breast pet ct protocol

Breast pet ct protocol

Breast pet ct protocol. DEFINING DIAGNOSTIC CT

.

The aim of this study is to determine if the choice of the 18 F-FDG-PET protocol, especially matrix size and reconstruction algorithm, is of importance to discriminate between immunohistochemical subtypes luminal versus non-luminal in breast cancer with textural features TFs. Forty-seven patients referred for breast cancer staging in the framework of a prospective study were reviewed as part of an ancillary study. PET standard metrics and TFs were extracted. For each reconstruction protocol, a prediction model for tumour classification was built using a random forests method.

Spearman coefficients were used to seek correlation between PET metrics. On matched comparisons, PSF breast reconstruction presented better abilities than PSF wholeBody and OSEM breast for the classification of luminal versus non-luminal breast tumours with an accuracy reaching Coarseness and ZLNU were found to be main variables of importance, appearing in all three prediction models.

High-resolution breast PET acquisitions, applying both small-voxel matrix and PSF modelling, appeared to improve the characterisation of breast tumours. Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer and the leading cause of death related to cancer in women worldwide [ 1 ]. It displays a large inter- and intra-tumour heterogeneity with a strong impact on patient management and outcome.

However, due to the high heterogeneity of breast cancers, FDG tumour uptake intensity measured as maximum standardised uptake value SUV max is highly variable, depending on multiple factors such as histological type, phenotypic type [ 5 ], proliferation index [ 6 ], histological grade and the presence of a P53 mutation [ 7 ] for example.

However, SUV max has been shown to be a prognostic index in invasive breast cancer [ 5 ]. In breast cancers, heterogeneous tumour FDG uptake appeared to be frequent, especially in large tumours with intense FDG uptake [ 17 ].

Interestingly, these heterogeneity parameters were not correlated to SUV, meaning that they can surely provide additional information. However, these results are controversial because other studies did not find any ability of textural features TFs to discriminate between immunohistochemical subtypes [ 21 , 22 ]. These findings thus suggest a potential role of textural features in breast cancer for non-invasive molecular subtype classification and subsequent patient prognosis stratification, but PET procedure seems to arise as a critical point in this field, especially when considering breast tumours that are usually small.

Indeed, for such small lesions, it had already been demonstrated that small-voxel reconstruction and latest reconstruction algorithms bring better signal-to-noise ratio and could improve tumoral detection and the sensitivity of visual lymph node characterisation [ 23 , 24 , 25 ]. Therefore, the aim of this ancillary prospective clinical study is to compare different PET protocols with regard to their ability to discriminate between luminal versus non-luminal breast tumours.

Informed and signed consent was obtained from all patients. Patients with newly diagnosed and histologically proven breast cancer for which breast surgery and axillary lymph node dissection was indicated were included from April to June Scatter and attenuation corrections were applied for both acquisitions. Injected dose, time between injection and acquisition and capillary glycaemia were recorded to seek for EANM recommendations fulfilment [ 26 ].

In case of multiple lesions, only the biggest lesion was considered. To be close to real clinical practice, each PET dataset was contoured independently as it would have been done in a PET unit. The PET gradient method was used because it had been shown to be reproducible, little impacted by reconstruction type and have the ability to encompass the entire tumour by taking into account cold zones as opposed to threshold based VOIs [ 27 ].

Moreover, it is widely available. Homogeneity, energy, contrast, correlation, entropy, dissimilarity from grey level co-occurrence matrix GLCM that takes into account the arrangements of pairs of voxels. Coarseness, contrast and busyness from neighbourhood grey-level different matrix NGLDM that corresponds to the difference of grey-level between one voxel and its 26 neighbours in 3 dimensions.

Further analyses were undergone. First, to assess the impact of quantification scaling, a supplemental analysis was undergone by using an upper SUV bound set to 32 for all 3 reconstructions leading to a size of bin of 0. Quantitative data are presented as the median interquartile range or the mean SD when appropriate. To compare PET metrics extracted from the three different reconstructions, non-parametric Friedman test with post-hoc test were used.

For each reconstruction protocol, a random forests RF method was used for building a prediction model for luminal versus non-luminal tumour classification. It allows studying the global heterogeneity of tumour rather than looking at individual features. For the validation, i. The importance of TFs in classification was assessed for each reconstruction protocol by measuring the mean decrease accuracy [ 34 ] of class prediction. Spearman coefficients were used to seek correlation between PET metrics of importance.

Finally, the first three main PET metrics were considered for further paired comparison between reconstruction protocols using Friedman test with post-hoc test, Spearman correlation tests and ROC analyses. Addinsoft, Paris, France For all statistical tests, a two-tailed P value of less than 0. Sixty-three patients were referred for the staging of breast carcinoma from April to June Six patients The mean injected dose was equal to The mean uptake time was Thirty five patients Of note, due to a very low MTV, only one patient was not analysable by all three reconstructions and therefore was not included in the subsequent statistical analysis.

Red cross represents the mean values. Interestingly, both protocols found coarseness and ZLNU to be variables of importance. Noticeably, variables of importance mean decrease accuracies were globally lower for PSF wholeBody images as compared to PSF breast images.

Left panels display the mean decrease accuracy of textural features values and right panels display Spearman correlation matrixes of all PET metrics found to have positive mean decrease accuracy, whatever the value for PSF wholeBody a and PSF breast b reconstructions.

The green corresponds to a correlation close to 0. When applying a size of bin equal to 0. Variables of importance and their correlations are displayed on Additional file 1 : Figure S1a. Variables of importance and their correlations for both protocols are displayed on Additional file 2 : Figure S2a. OOB estimates were equal to Both protocols showed high sensitivity but low specificity for the luminal status detection: the best specificity was obtained using PSF breast with a value equal to Left panels display the mean decrease accuracy of textural features values and right panels display Spearman correlation matrixes of all PET metrics found to have positive mean decrease accuracy, whatever the value for OSEM breast a and PSF breast b reconstructions.

Variables of importance and their correlations are displayed on Additional file 1 : Figure S1b. Variables of importance and their correlations for both protocols are displayed on Additional file 2 : Figure S2b. Representative images of one luminal and one non-luminal breast tumours are shown on Fig. Red cross in box plots represents the mean values and circle extreme values. Representative images of one luminal a and one non-luminal b breast tumour.

The non-luminal tumour was a T2N1M0 triple-negative ductal carcinoma. As expected, there was a limited number of analysable tumours when using PSF wholeBody. On matched comparison, PSF breast reconstruction presented better abilities than PSF wholeBody and OSEM breast for the classification of luminal versus non-luminal breast tumours with an accuracy reaching Using the same heterogeneity quantification scale for all three reconstructions, PSF breast still showed higher abilities than others reconstructions.

Noticeably, it displayed a high sensitivity but low specificity for the detection of luminal status. One could consider that the delay between whole body acquisition and the dedicated breast acquisition may have influenced our results. Considering image noise, one could have expected that using a small-voxel matrix would have led to higher noise in PSF breast images as compared to PSF wholeBody. However, no significant difference in CoV was observed in the present study among all reconstruction protocols, but the small matrix size may have been counterbalanced by a longer acquisition time.

This is in accordance with our previous publication [ 36 ] that compared those two types of reconstruction. Regarding PET metrics extracted from NGLDM matrix and especially coarseness, there was higher values dispersion with PSF breast reconstruction, especially for small lesions and a better area under the ROC for luminal versus non-luminal status determination.

Besides, this metric was not correlated to SUV max suggesting that it could provide additional information. Concerning heterogeneity quantification process, the main analysis was designed in order to obtain data as close as possible to what could have been done in routine clinical practice, for example in PET units using different reconstruction algorithms.

To test the influence of quantification scale, a supplemental analysis was made using same SUV bounds for all reconstructions leading to same bin widths and showed no major change as compared to the first analysis. When it comes to VOIs delineation, an appropriate VOI for each reconstruction seems more relevant to answer the question of the influence of reconstruction on FDG radiomics.

Indeed, using the same volume of interest for all reconstructions is never meant to happen in clinical practice. Besides, using same VOIs or independent VOIs between different reconstructions showed almost no influence on a panel of second- and third-order textural features in a previous study [ 36 ]. Finally, small-voxel post-reconstruction resampling did not provide better capabilities in terms of histological classification and therefore seems to offer no additional information.

This study had some limitations. First of all, although random forests allowed matched comparison of datasets, it surely did not give definitive results concerning the ability of TFs in discriminating histological characteristics of breast tumours in view of the limited number of patients.

The limited number of patients did not allow us to consider all histological tumour subtypes and therefore the discriminative power of TFs was restricted to luminal versus non-luminal tumours.

However, the aim of the present study was not to have definitive results concerning PET abilities for histological discrimination. It demonstrated that a combination of PSF modelling and small-voxel reconstruction seems to be the best strategy to obtain additional information over conventional PET metrics and should be used when characterising the intra-tumoral FDG heterogeneity of breast cancers. High-resolution breast PET acquisitions, applying both small-voxel matrix and PSF modelling, appeared to be necessary to improve the characterisation of breast tumours, especially when seeking a link between 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose heterogeneity and histological characteristics in breast cancer.

Int J Cancer. Turashvili G, Brogi E. Tumor heterogeneity in breast cancer. Front Med. Breast Edinb Scotl. FDG uptake in breast cancer: correlation with biological and clinical prognostic parameters.

Correlation of high 18F-FDG uptake to clinical, pathological and biological prognostic factors in breast cancer. Are pretreatment 18F-FDG PET tumor textural features in non-small cell lung cancer associated with response and survival after chemoradiotherapy? Intratumor heterogeneity characterized by textural features on baseline 18F-FDG PET images predicts response to concomitant radiochemotherapy in esophageal cancer.

The incremental value of subjective and quantitative assessment of 18F-FDG PET for the prediction of pathologic complete response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy in esophageal cancer. Nucl Med Commun. Texture analysis of high-resolution dedicated breast 18 F-FDG PET images correlates with immunohistochemical factors and subtype of breast cancer. PLoS One. J Nucl Med Technol.

Breast pet ct protocol

Breast pet ct protocol

Breast pet ct protocol