PET/MR in invasive ductal breast cancer: correlation between imaging markers and histological phenotype.

BACKGROUND: Differences in genetics and receptor expression (phenotypes) of invasive ductal breast cancer (IDC) impact on prognosis and treatment response. Immunohistochemistry (IHC), the most used technique for IDC phenotyping, has some limitations including its invasiveness. We explored the possibility of contrast-enhanced positron emission tomography magnetic resonance (CE-FDG PET/MR) to discriminate IDC phenotypes. METHODS: 21 IDC patients with IHC assessment of oestrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor-2 (HER2), and antigen Ki-67 (Ki67) underwent CE-FDG PET/MR. Magnetic resonance-perfusion biomarkers, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and standard uptake value (SUV) were compared with IHC markers and phenotypes, using a Student's t-test and one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: ER/PR- tumours demonstrated higher Kepmean and SUVmax than ER or PR+ tumours. HER2- tumours displayed higher ADCmean, Kepmean, and SUVmax than HER2+tumours. Only ADCmean discriminated Ki67⩽14% tumours (lower ADCmean) from Ki67>14% tumours. PET/MR biomarkers correlated with IHC phenotype in 13 out of 21 patients (62%; P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Positron emission tomography magnetic resonance might non-invasively help discriminate IDC phenotypes, helping to optimise individual therapy options.

An overview of PET/MR, focused on clinical applications.

Hybrid PET/MR scanners are innovative imaging devices that simultaneously or sequentially acquire and fuse anatomical and functional data from magnetic resonance (MR) with metabolic information from positron emission tomography (PET) (Delso et al. in J Nucl Med 52:1914-1922, 2011; Zaidi et al. in Phys Med Biol 56:3091-3106, 2011). Hybrid PET/MR scanners have the potential to greatly impact not only on medical research but also, and more importantly, on patient management. Although their clinical applications are still under investigation, the increased worldwide availability of PET/MR scanners, and the growing published literature are important determinants in their rising utilization for primarily clinical applications. In this manuscript, we provide a summary of the physical features of PET/MR, including its limitations, which are most relevant to clinical PET/MR implementation and to interpretation. Thereafter, we discuss the most important current and emergent clinical applications of such hybrid technology in the abdomen and pelvis, both in the field of oncologic and non-oncologic imaging, and we provide, when possible, a comparison with clinically consolidated imaging techniques, like for example PET/CT.

Staging performance of whole-body DWI, PET/CT and PET/MRI in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the performance of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging (WB-DWI), whole-body positron emission tomography with computed tomography (WB-PET/CT), and whole-body positron emission tomography with magnetic resonance imaging (WB-PET/MRI) in staging patients with untreated invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Fifty-one women with newly diagnosed invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast underwent WB-DWI, WB-PET/CT and WB-PET/MRI before treatment. A radiologist and a nuclear medicine physician reviewed in consensus the images from the three modalities and searched for occurrence, number and location of metastases. Final staging, according to each technique, was compared. Pathology and imaging follow-up were used as the reference. WB-DWI, WB-PET/CT and WB-PET/MRI correctly and concordantly staged 33/51 patients: stage IIA in 7 patients, stage IIB in 8 patients, stage IIIC in 4 patients and stage IV in 14 patients. WB-DWI, WB-PET/CT and WB-PET/MRI incorrectly and concordantly staged 1/51 patient as stage IV instead of IIIA. Discordant staging was reported in 17/51 patients. WB-PET/MRI resulted in improved staging when compared to WB-PET/CT (50 correctly staged on WB-PET/MRI vs. 38 correctly staged on WB-PET/CT; McNemar's test; p<0.01). Comparing the performance of WB-PET/MRI and WB-DWI (43 correct) did not reveal a statistically significant difference (McNemar test, p=0.14). WB-PET/MRI is more accurate in the initial staging of breast cancer than WB-DWI and WB-PET/CT, however, the discrepancies between WB-PET/MRI and WB-DWI were not statistically significant. When available, WB-PET/MRI should be considered for staging patient with invasive ductal breast carcinoma.