FDG-PET/CT Versus Contrast-Enhanced CT for Response Evaluation in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

62 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with integrated computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) can be used for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this study, we aimed to review literature comparing the PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in patients with MBC. We made a systematic search in Embase, PubMed/Medline, and Cochrane Library using a modified PICO model. The population was MBC patients and the intervention was PERCIST or RECIST. Quality assessment was performed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. A total of 1975 articles were identified. After screening by title/abstract, 78 articles were selected for further analysis of which 2 duplicates and 33 abstracts/out of focus articles were excluded. The remaining 43 articles provided useful information, but only one met the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria. This was a retrospective study of 65 patients with MBC showing one-year progression-free survival for responders versus non-responders to be 59% vs. 27% (p = 0.2) by RECIST compared to 64% vs. 0% (p = 0.0001) by PERCIST. This systematic literature review identified a lack of studies comparing the use of RECIST (with CE-CT) and PERCIST (with FDG-PET/CT) for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer. The available sparse literature suggests that PERCIST might be more appropriate than RECIST for predicting prognosis in patients with MBC.

Original languageEnglish
Article number106
JournalDiagnostics
Volume9
Issue number3
Number of pages14
ISSN2075-4418
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27. Aug 2019

Fingerprint

Positron emission tomography
Tomography
Tumors
Neoplasms
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
Checklist
PubMed
Libraries
Disease-Free Survival
Retrospective Studies
Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors
Screening
Population

Cite this

@article{8b0c2842a020452798df66e0aa9d7423,
title = "FDG-PET/CT Versus Contrast-Enhanced CT for Response Evaluation in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review",
abstract = "18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with integrated computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) can be used for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this study, we aimed to review literature comparing the PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in patients with MBC. We made a systematic search in Embase, PubMed/Medline, and Cochrane Library using a modified PICO model. The population was MBC patients and the intervention was PERCIST or RECIST. Quality assessment was performed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. A total of 1975 articles were identified. After screening by title/abstract, 78 articles were selected for further analysis of which 2 duplicates and 33 abstracts/out of focus articles were excluded. The remaining 43 articles provided useful information, but only one met the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria. This was a retrospective study of 65 patients with MBC showing one-year progression-free survival for responders versus non-responders to be 59{\%} vs. 27{\%} (p = 0.2) by RECIST compared to 64{\%} vs. 0{\%} (p = 0.0001) by PERCIST. This systematic literature review identified a lack of studies comparing the use of RECIST (with CE-CT) and PERCIST (with FDG-PET/CT) for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer. The available sparse literature suggests that PERCIST might be more appropriate than RECIST for predicting prognosis in patients with MBC.",
author = "Fredrik Helland and {Hallin Henriksen}, Martine and Oke Gerke and Marianne Vogsen and H{\o}ilund-Carlsen, {Poul Flemming} and Hildebrandt, {Malene Grubbe}",
year = "2019",
month = "8",
day = "27",
doi = "10.3390/diagnostics9030106",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
journal = "Diagnostics",
issn = "2075-4418",
publisher = "MDPI",
number = "3",

}

FDG-PET/CT Versus Contrast-Enhanced CT for Response Evaluation in Metastatic Breast Cancer : A Systematic Review. / Helland, Fredrik; Hallin Henriksen, Martine; Gerke, Oke; Vogsen, Marianne; Høilund-Carlsen, Poul Flemming; Hildebrandt, Malene Grubbe.

In: Diagnostics, Vol. 9, No. 3, 106, 27.08.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - FDG-PET/CT Versus Contrast-Enhanced CT for Response Evaluation in Metastatic Breast Cancer

T2 - A Systematic Review

AU - Helland, Fredrik

AU - Hallin Henriksen, Martine

AU - Gerke, Oke

AU - Vogsen, Marianne

AU - Høilund-Carlsen, Poul Flemming

AU - Hildebrandt, Malene Grubbe

PY - 2019/8/27

Y1 - 2019/8/27

N2 - 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with integrated computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) can be used for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this study, we aimed to review literature comparing the PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in patients with MBC. We made a systematic search in Embase, PubMed/Medline, and Cochrane Library using a modified PICO model. The population was MBC patients and the intervention was PERCIST or RECIST. Quality assessment was performed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. A total of 1975 articles were identified. After screening by title/abstract, 78 articles were selected for further analysis of which 2 duplicates and 33 abstracts/out of focus articles were excluded. The remaining 43 articles provided useful information, but only one met the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria. This was a retrospective study of 65 patients with MBC showing one-year progression-free survival for responders versus non-responders to be 59% vs. 27% (p = 0.2) by RECIST compared to 64% vs. 0% (p = 0.0001) by PERCIST. This systematic literature review identified a lack of studies comparing the use of RECIST (with CE-CT) and PERCIST (with FDG-PET/CT) for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer. The available sparse literature suggests that PERCIST might be more appropriate than RECIST for predicting prognosis in patients with MBC.

AB - 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with integrated computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) can be used for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). In this study, we aimed to review literature comparing the PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (PERCIST) with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) in patients with MBC. We made a systematic search in Embase, PubMed/Medline, and Cochrane Library using a modified PICO model. The population was MBC patients and the intervention was PERCIST or RECIST. Quality assessment was performed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. A total of 1975 articles were identified. After screening by title/abstract, 78 articles were selected for further analysis of which 2 duplicates and 33 abstracts/out of focus articles were excluded. The remaining 43 articles provided useful information, but only one met the inclusion and none of the exclusion criteria. This was a retrospective study of 65 patients with MBC showing one-year progression-free survival for responders versus non-responders to be 59% vs. 27% (p = 0.2) by RECIST compared to 64% vs. 0% (p = 0.0001) by PERCIST. This systematic literature review identified a lack of studies comparing the use of RECIST (with CE-CT) and PERCIST (with FDG-PET/CT) for response evaluation in metastatic breast cancer. The available sparse literature suggests that PERCIST might be more appropriate than RECIST for predicting prognosis in patients with MBC.

U2 - 10.3390/diagnostics9030106

DO - 10.3390/diagnostics9030106

M3 - Review

C2 - 31461923

VL - 9

JO - Diagnostics

JF - Diagnostics

SN - 2075-4418

IS - 3

M1 - 106

ER -