Response Monitoring in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Prospective Study Comparing 18F-FDG PET/CT with Conventional CT

Joint EANM-SNMMI guideline on the role of 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT in no special type breast cancer : (endorsed by the ACR, ESSO, ESTRO, EUSOBI/ESR, and EUSOMA)

INTRODUCTION

There is much literature about the role of 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT in patients with breast cancer (BC). However, there exists no international guideline with involvement of the nuclear medicine societies about this subject.

PURPOSE

To provide an organized, international, state-of-the-art, and multidisciplinary guideline, led by experts of two nuclear medicine societies (EANM and SNMMI) and representation of important societies in the field of BC (ACR, ESSO, ESTRO, EUSOBI/ESR, and EUSOMA).

METHODS

Literature review and expert discussion were performed with the aim of collecting updated information regarding the role of 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT in patients with no special type (NST) BC and summarizing its indications according to scientific evidence. Recommendations were scored according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criteria.

RESULTS

Quantitative PET features (SUV, MTV, TLG) are valuable prognostic parameters. In baseline staging, 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT plays a role from stage IIB through stage IV. When assessing response to therapy, 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT should be performed on certified scanners, and reported either according to PERCIST, EORTC PET, or EANM immunotherapy response criteria, as appropriate. 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT may be useful to assess early metabolic response, particularly in non-metastatic triple-negative and HER2+ tumours. 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT is useful to detect the site and extent of recurrence when conventional imaging methods are equivocal and when there is clinical and/or laboratorial suspicion of relapse. Recent developments are promising.

CONCLUSION

2-[18F]FDG PET/CT is extremely useful in BC management, as supported by extensive evidence of its utility compared to other imaging modalities in several clinical scenarios.

SPECT/CT, PET/CT, and PET/MRI for Response Assessment of Bone Metastases

Recent developments in hybrid SPECT/CT systems and the use of cadmium-zinc-telluride (CZT) detectors have improved the diagnostic accuracy of bone scintigraphy. These advancements have paved the way for novel quantitative approaches to accurate and reproducible treatment monitoring of bone metastases. PET/CT imaging using [18F]F-FDG and [18F]F-NaF have shown promising clinical utility in bone metastases assessment and monitoring response to therapy and prediction of treatment response in a broad range of malignancies. Additionally, specific tumor-targeting tracers like [99mTc]Tc-PSMA, [68Ga]Ga-PSMA, or [11C]C- or [18F]F-Choline revealed high diagnostic performance for early assessment and prognostication of bone metastases, particularly in prostate cancer. PET/MRI appears highly accurate imaging modality, but has associated limitations notably, limited availability, more complex logistics and high installation costs. Advances in artificial intelligence (Al) seem to improve the accuracy of imaging modalities and provide an assistant role in the evaluation of treatment response of bone metastases.

Quarter-Century Transformation of Oncology: Positron Emission Tomography for Patients with Breast Cancer

PET radiotracers have become indispensable in the care of patients with breast cancer. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose has become the preferred method of many oncologists for systemic staging of breast cancer at initial diagnosis, detecting recurrent disease, and for measuring treatment response after therapy. 18F-Sodium Fluoride is valuable for detection of osseous metastases. 18F-fluoroestradiol is now FDA-approved with multiple appropriate clinical uses. There are multiple PET radiotracers in clinical trials, which may add utility of PET imaging for patients with breast cancer in the future. This article will describe the advances during the last quarter century in PET for patients with breast cancer.

Women's Health Update: Growing Role of PET for Patients with Breast Cancer

Positron Emission Tomography (PET) has been growing in usage for patients with breast cancer, due to an increased number of FDA-approved PET radiotracers pertinent to patients with breast cancer as well as increased prospective evidence for the value of these agents. The leading PET radiotracer for patients with breast cancer is 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG), which measures glucose metabolism. There is prospective evidence for the use of 18F-FDG PET in systemic staging of newly diagnosed locally advanced breast cancer (stages IIB-IIIC), monitoring breast cancer treatment response, and detecting breast cancer recurrence, particularly in no special type (NST) breast cancer. 16α-18F-fluoro-17β-Fluoroestradiol (18F-FES) is a radiolabeled estrogen which evaluates estrogen receptor (ER) accessible for estrogen binding. There is prospective evidence supporting 18F-FES PET as a predictive biomarker for selecting patients with metastatic breast cancer for endocrine therapies. 18F-FES PET has also been shown to be valuable in the evaluation of ER status of lesions which are difficult to biopsy, for evaluation of ER status in lesions that are equivocal on other imaging modalities, and for selecting optimal dosage of novel ER-targeted systemic therapies in early clinical trials. Multiple investigators have suggested 18F-FES PET will have an increasing role for patients with invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC), which is less optimally evaluated by 18F-FDG PET. Sodium 18F-Fluoride (18F-NaF) evaluates bone turnover and has been effective in evaluation of malignancies which commonly metastasize to bone. In patients with metastatic breast cancer, 18F-NaF PET/CT has demonstrated superior sensitivity for osseous metastases than 99mTc-MDP or CT. In addition to these three FDA-approved PET radiotracers, there are multiple novel radiotracers currently in clinical trials with potential to further increase PET usage for patients with breast cancer.

Imaging Molecular Targets and Metabolic Pathways in Breast Cancer for Improved Clinical Management: Current Practice and Future Perspectives

Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Timely decision-making that enables implementation of the most appropriate therapy or therapies is essential for achieving the best clinical outcomes in breast cancer. While clinicopathologic characteristics and immunohistochemistry have traditionally been used in decision-making, these clinical and laboratory parameters may be difficult to ascertain or be equivocal due to tumor heterogeneity. Tumor heterogeneity is described as a phenomenon characterized by spatial or temporal phenotypic variations in tumor characteristics. Spatial variations occur within tumor lesions or between lesions at a single time point while temporal variations are seen as tumor lesions evolve with time. Due to limitations associated with immunohistochemistry (which requires invasive biopsies), whole-body molecular imaging tools such as standard-of-care [18F]FDG and [18F]FES PET/CT are indispensable in addressing this conundrum. Despite their proven utility, these standard-of-care imaging methods are often unable to image a myriad of other molecular pathways associated with breast cancer. This has stimulated interest in the development of novel radiopharmaceuticals targeting other molecular pathways and processes. In this review, we discuss validated and potential roles of these standard-of-care and novel molecular approaches. These approaches' relationships with patient clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical characteristics as well as their influence on patient management will be discussed in greater detail. This paper will also introduce and discuss the potential utility of novel PARP inhibitor-based radiopharmaceuticals as non-invasive biomarkers of PARP expression/upregulation.

Nuclear medicine imaging for bone metastases assessment: what else besides bone scintigraphy in the era of personalized medicine?

Accurate detection and reliable assessment of therapeutic responses in bone metastases are imperative for guiding treatment decisions, preserving quality of life, and ultimately enhancing overall survival. Nuclear imaging has historically played a pivotal role in this realm, offering a diverse range of radiotracers and imaging modalities. While the conventional bone scan using 99mTc marked bisphosphonates has remained widely utilized, its diagnostic performance is hindered by certain limitations. Positron emission tomography, particularly when coupled with computed tomography, provides improved spatial resolution and diagnostic performance with various pathology-specific radiotracers. This review aims to evaluate the performance of different nuclear imaging modalities in clinical practice for detecting and monitoring the therapeutic responses in bone metastases of diverse origins, addressing their limitations and implications for image interpretation.

Evaluation of Treatment Response in Patients with Breast Cancer

Breast cancer (BC) remains one of the leading causes of death among women. The management and outcome in BC are strongly influenced by a multidisciplinary approach, which includes available treatment options and different imaging modalities for accurate response assessment. Among breast imaging modalities, MR imaging is the modality of choice in evaluating response to neoadjuvant therapy, whereas F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, conventional computed tomography (CT), and bone scan play a vital role in assessing response to therapy in metastatic BC. There is an unmet need for a standardized patient-centric approach to use different imaging methods for response assessment.

Cost-effectiveness of 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT versus CE-CT for response monitoring in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a register-based comparative study

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT compared to CE-CT for response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients. The study included 300 biopsy-verified MBC patients treated at Odense University Hospital (Denmark). CE-CT was used in 144 patients, 83 patients underwent 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT, and 73 patients received a combination of both. Hospital resource-based costs (2007-2019) were adjusted to the 2019 level. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated by comparing average costs per patient and gained survival with CE-CT. During a median follow-up of 33.0 months, patients in the 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT group had more short admissions (median 6 vs. 2) and fewer overnight admissions (5 vs. 12) compared to the CE-CT group. The mean total cost per patient was €91,547 for CE-CT, €83,965 for 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT, and €165,784 for the combined group. The ICER for 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT compared to CE-CT was €-527/month, indicating gaining an extra month of survival at a lower cost (€527). 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT was more cost-effective in patients with favorable prognostic factors (oligometastatic or estrogen receptor-positive disease), while CE-CT was more cost-effective in poor prognosis patients (liver/lung metastases or performance status ≥ 2 at baseline). In conclusion, our study suggests that 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a cost-effective modality for response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer.

Molecular imaging as biomarker for treatment response and outcome in breast cancer

Molecular imaging, such as positron emission tomography (PET), is increasingly used as biomarker to predict and assess treatment response in breast cancer. The number of biomarkers is expanding with specific tracers for tumour characteristics throughout the body and this information can be used to aid the decision-making process. These measurements include metabolic activity using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET ([18F]FDG-PET), oestrogen receptor (ER) expression using 16α-[18F]Fluoro-17β-oestradiol ([18F]FES)-PET and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression using PET with radiolabelled trastuzumab (HER2-PET). In early breast cancer, baseline [18F]FDG-PET is frequently used for staging, but limited subtype-specific data reduce its usefulness as biomarker for treatment response or outcome. Early metabolic change on serial [18F]FDG-PET is increasingly used in the neo-adjuvant setting as dynamic biomarker to predict pathological complete response to systemic therapy, potentially allowing de-intensification or step-up intensification of treatment. In the metastatic setting, baseline [18F]FDG-PET and [18F]FES-PET can be used as biomarker to predict treatment response, in triple-negative and ER-positive breast cancer, respectively. Metabolic progression on repeated [18F]FDG-PET appears to precede progressive disease on standard evaluation imaging; however, subtype-specific studies are limited and more prospective data are needed before implementation in clinical practice. Even though (repeated) [18F]FDG-PET, [18F]FES-PET and HER2-PEt all show promising results as biomarkers to predict therapy response and outcome, for eventual integration into clinical practice, future studies will have to clarify at what timepoint this integration has to optimally take place.

2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer

This study aimed to compare CE-CT and 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT for response monitoring metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The primary objective was to predict progression-free and disease-specific survival for responders vs. non-responders on CE-CT and 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT. The secondary objective was to assess agreement between response categorization for the two modalities. Treatment response in women with MBC was monitored prospectively by simultaneous CE-CT and 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT, allowing participants to serve as their own controls. The standardized response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1) and PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST) were used for response categorization. For prediction of progression-free and disease-specific survival, treatment response was dichotomized into responders (partial and complete response) and non-responders (stable and progressive disease) at the first follow-up scan. Progression-free survival was defined as the time from baseline until disease progression or death from any cause. Disease-specific survival was defined as the time from baseline until breast cancer-specific death. Agreement between response categorization for both modalities was analyzed for all response categories and responders vs. non-responders. At the first follow-up, tumor response was reported more often by 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT than CE-CT, with only fair agreement on response categorization between the two modalities (weighted Kappa 0.28). Two-year progression-free survival for responders vs. non-responders by CE-CT was 54.2% vs. 46.0%, compared with 59.1% vs. 14.3% by 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT. Correspondingly, 2-year disease-specific survival were 83.3% vs. 77.8% for CE-CT and 84.6% vs. 61.9% for 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT. Tumor response on 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT was significantly associated with progression-free (HR: 3.49, P < 0.001) and disease-specific survival (HR 2.35, P = 0.008), while no association was found for tumor response on CE-CT. In conclusion, 2-[¹⁸F]FDG-PET/CT appears a better predictor of progression-free and disease-specific survival than CE-CT when used to monitor metastatic breast cancer. In addition, we found low concordance between response categorization between the two modalities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical.

TRIALS

gov. NCT03358589. Registered 30/11/2017-Retrospectively registered, http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov.