Diagnostic effectiveness of [18F]Fluoroestradiol PET/CT in oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: the key role of histopathology. Evidence from an international multicentre prospective study.

INTRODUCTION: [18F]Fluoroestradiol ([18F]FES) PET/CT has been proposed as a tool for detecting the oestrogen receptor density in patients with metastatic breast cancer (BC) non-invasively across all disease localizations. However, its diagnostic potential in terms of the detection rate (DR) of metastases is unclear. In this study, we pitted this method against [18F]FDG PET/CT and tried to identify predictors of the diagnostic superiority of the [18F] FES-based method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a multicentre database, we enrolled all patients with metastatic BC who had undergone both [18F]FES PET/CT and [18F]FDG PET/CT. Two readers assessed both images independently and used a patient-based (PBA) and lesion-based analysis (LBA) to calculate the DR. Pathology-related and clinical factors were tested as predictors of [18F]FES PET/CT superiority using a multivariate model. RESULTS: 92 patients, bearing a total of 2678 metastases, were enrolled. On PBA, the DR of [18F]FDG and [18F]FES PET/CT was 97% and 86%, respectively (p = 0.018). On LBA, the [18F]FES method proved more sensitive than [18F]FDG PET/CT in lymph nodes, bone, lung and soft tissue (p < 0.01). This greater sensitivity was associated with lobular histology, both on PBA (Odds Ratio (OR) 3.4, 95%CI 1.0-12.3) and on LBA (OR 4.4, 95%CI 1.2-16.1 for lymph node metastases and OR 3.29, 95%CI 1.1-10.2 for bone localizations). CONCLUSIONS: The overall DR of [18F]FES PET/CT appears to be lower than that of [18F]FDG PET/CT on PBA. However, the [18F]FES method, if positive, can identify more lesions than [18F]FDG at most sites. The higher sensitivity of [18F]FES PET/CT was associated with lobular histology.

Risk of metachronous contralateral breast cancer in patients with primary invasive lobular breast cancer: Results from a nationwide cohort.

Lobular primary breast cancer (PBC) histology has been proposed as a risk factor for contralateral breast cancer (CBC), but results have been inconsistent. We investigated CBC risk and the impact of systemic therapy in lobular versus ductal PBC. Further, CBC characteristics following these histologic subtypes were explored. We selected 74,373 women diagnosed between 2003 and 2010 with stage I-III invasive PBC from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. We assessed absolute risk of CBC taking into account competing risks among those with lobular (n = 8903), lobular mixed with other types (n = 3512), versus ductal (n = 62,230) histology. Hazard ratios (HR) for CBC were estimated in a cause-specific Cox model, adjusting for age at PBC diagnosis, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy. Multivariable HRs for CBC were 1.18 (95% CI: 1.04-1.33) for lobular and 1.37 (95% CI: 1.16-1.63) for lobular mixed versus ductal PBC. Ten-year cumulative CBC incidences in patients with lobular, lobular mixed versus ductal PBC were 3.2%, 3.6% versus 2.8% when treated with systemic therapy and 6.6%, 7.7% versus 5.6% in patients without systemic therapy, respectively. Metachronous CBCs were diagnosed in a less favourable stage in 19%, 26% and 23% and less favourable differentiation grade in 22%, 33% and 27% than the PBCs of patients with lobular, lobular mixed and ductal PBC, respectively. In conclusion, lobular and lobular mixed PBC histology are associated with modestly increased CBC risk. Personalised CBC risk assessment needs to consider PBC histology, including systemic treatment administration. The impact on prognosis of CBCs with unfavourable characteristics warrants further evaluation.

Do non-classic invasive lobular carcinomas derive a benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy?

PURPOSE: Invasive lobular breast cancers (ILCs) respond poorly to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The degree of benefit of NAC among non-classic ILC (NC-ILC) variants compared with classic ILCs (C-ILCs) is unknown. METHODS: Consecutive patients with Stage I-III ILC treated from 2003 to 2019 with NAC and surgery were identified, and grouped as C-ILC or NC-ILC as per the original surgical pathology report, with pathologist (A.G.) review performed if original categorization was unclear. A subset of similarly treated invasive ductal cancers (IDCs) was identified for comparison. Clinicopathologic characteristics and pathologic complete response (pCR) rates were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 145 patients with ILC, 101 (70%) were C-ILC and 44 (30%) were NC-ILC (IDC cohort: 1157 patients). ILC patients were older, more often cT3/T4 and cN2/N3, and less often high-grade compared to IDC patients. Those with NC-ILC were less often ER+/HER2- (55% versus 93%), and more often HER2 + (25% versus 7%) and TN (21% versus 0%, all p < 0.001). Breast pCR was more common among NC-ILC, but most frequent in IDC. Nodal pCR rates were also lowest among C-ILC patients, but similar among NC-ILC and IDC patients. On multivariable analysis, C-ILC (OR 0.09) and LVI (OR 0.51) were predictive of lack of breast pCR; non-ER+/HER2- subtypes and breast pCR were predictive of nodal pCR. When our analysis was repeated with patients stratified by receptor subtype, histology was not independently predictive of either breast or nodal pCR. CONCLUSION: NC-ILC patients were significantly more likely to achieve breast and nodal pCR compared with C-ILC patients, but when stratified by subtype, histology was not independently predictive of breast or nodal pCR.