Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine 3/2021

01-03-2021 | Breast Cancer | Others

Clinical practice guidelines for high-resolution breast PET, 2019 edition

Authors: Yoko Satoh, Masami Kawamoto, Kazunori Kubota, Koji Murakami, Makoto Hosono, Michio Senda, Masayuki Sasaki, Toshimitsu Momose, Kengo Ito, Terue Okamura, Keiichi Oda, Yuji Kuge, Minoru Sakurai, Ukihide Tateishi, Yasuhisa Fujibayashi, Yasuhiro Magata, Takeshi Yoshida, Atsuo Waki, Katsuhiko Kato, Teisuke Hashimoto, Mayuki Uchiyama, Seigo Kinuya, Tatsuya Higashi, Yasuhiro Magata, Akihiro Machitori, Hirotaka Maruno, Ryogo Minamimoto, Keiichiro Yoshinaga

Published in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine | Issue 3/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Breast positron emission tomography (PET) has had insurance coverage when performed with conventional whole-body PET in Japan since 2013. Together with whole-body PET, accurate examination of breast cancer and diagnosis of metastatic disease are possible, and are expected to contribute significantly to its treatment planning. To facilitate a safer, smoother, and more appropriate examination, the Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine published the first edition of practice guidelines for high-resolution breast PET in 2013. Subsequently, new types of breast PET have been developed and their clinical usefulness clarified. Therefore, the guidelines for breast PET were revised in 2019. This article updates readers as to what is new in the second edition. This edition supports two different types of breast PET depending on the placement of the detector: the opposite-type (positron emission mammography; PEM) and the ring-shaped type (dedicated breast PET; dbPET), providing an overview of these scanners and appropriate imaging methods, their clinical applications, and future prospects. The name “dedicated breast PET” from the first edition is widely used to refer to ring-shaped type breast PET. In this edition, “breast PET” has been defined as a term that refers to both opposite- and ring-shaped devices. Up-to-date breast PET practice guidelines would help provide useful information for evidence-based breast imaging.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
3.
go back to reference Japan Breast Cancer Society Edition. Guidelines for diagnosis of breast cancer 1 and 2. 2018th ed. Tokyo: Kanehara publication; 2018. Japan Breast Cancer Society Edition. Guidelines for diagnosis of breast cancer 1 and 2. 2018th ed. Tokyo: Kanehara publication; 2018.
5.
go back to reference Fowler AM. A molecular approach to breast imaging. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:177–80.CrossRef Fowler AM. A molecular approach to breast imaging. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:177–80.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Guidelines for PET Exams Using FDGs Manufactured In-House (2nd Ed.) (Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine). Nucl Med 2005; 42(4):1–22. Guidelines for PET Exams Using FDGs Manufactured In-House (2nd Ed.) (Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine). Nucl Med 2005; 42(4):1–22.
7.
go back to reference Guidelines for Imaging Technology in FDG-PET Examination (Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine and Technology). Nucl Med Tech 2007; 27: 425–56. Guidelines for Imaging Technology in FDG-PET Examination (Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine and Technology). Nucl Med Tech 2007; 27: 425–56.
8.
go back to reference Schilling K, Conti P, Adler L, Tafra L. The role of positron emission mammography in breast cancer imaging and management. Appl Radiol. 2008;37(4):26–36. Schilling K, Conti P, Adler L, Tafra L. The role of positron emission mammography in breast cancer imaging and management. Appl Radiol. 2008;37(4):26–36.
9.
go back to reference Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Larsen LH, et al. Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast. Radiology. 2011;258(1):59–72.CrossRef Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Larsen LH, et al. Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast. Radiology. 2011;258(1):59–72.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Schilling K, Narayanan D, Kalinyak JE, The J, Velasquez MV, Kahn S, et al. Positron emission mammography in breast cancer presurgical planning: comparisons with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(1):23–36.CrossRef Schilling K, Narayanan D, Kalinyak JE, The J, Velasquez MV, Kahn S, et al. Positron emission mammography in breast cancer presurgical planning: comparisons with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(1):23–36.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Iima M, Nakamoto Y, Kanao S, Sugie T, Ueno T, Kawada M, et al. Clinical performance of 2 dedicated PET scanners for breast imaging: initial evaluation. J Nucl Med. 2012;53(10):1534–42.CrossRef Iima M, Nakamoto Y, Kanao S, Sugie T, Ueno T, Kawada M, et al. Clinical performance of 2 dedicated PET scanners for breast imaging: initial evaluation. J Nucl Med. 2012;53(10):1534–42.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference ICRP. Radiation Dose to Patients from Radiopharmaceuticals. ICRP Publication 53. Ann. ICRP 18. 1988, p. 1–4. ICRP. Radiation Dose to Patients from Radiopharmaceuticals. ICRP Publication 53. Ann. ICRP 18. 1988, p. 1–4.
13.
go back to reference Narayanan D, Madsen KS, Kalinyak JE, Berg WA. Interpretation of positron emission mammography and MRI by experienced breast imaging radiologists: performance and observer reproducibility. ARJ Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(4):971–81.CrossRef Narayanan D, Madsen KS, Kalinyak JE, Berg WA. Interpretation of positron emission mammography and MRI by experienced breast imaging radiologists: performance and observer reproducibility. ARJ Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(4):971–81.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Nishimatsu K, Nakamoto Y, Miyake KK, Ishimori T, Kanao S, Toi M, et al. Higher breast cancer conspicuity on dbPET compared to WB-PET/CT. Eur J Radiol. 2017;90:138–45.CrossRef Nishimatsu K, Nakamoto Y, Miyake KK, Ishimori T, Kanao S, Toi M, et al. Higher breast cancer conspicuity on dbPET compared to WB-PET/CT. Eur J Radiol. 2017;90:138–45.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Larsen LH, et al. Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast. Radiology. 2011;258:59–72.CrossRef Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Larsen LH, et al. Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast. Radiology. 2011;258:59–72.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Yamamoto Y, Tasaki Y, Kuwada Y, Ozawa Y, Inoue T. A preliminary report of breast cancer screening by positron emission mammography. Ann Nucl Med. 2016;30:130–7.CrossRef Yamamoto Y, Tasaki Y, Kuwada Y, Ozawa Y, Inoue T. A preliminary report of breast cancer screening by positron emission mammography. Ann Nucl Med. 2016;30:130–7.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Japanese Breast Cancer Society. Guidelines for diagnosis of breast cancer 1 and 2. 2018th ed. Tokyo: Kanehara Shuppan; 2018. Japanese Breast Cancer Society. Guidelines for diagnosis of breast cancer 1 and 2. 2018th ed. Tokyo: Kanehara Shuppan; 2018.
18.
go back to reference Gnerlich JL, Deshpande AD, Jeffe DB, Sweet A, White N, Margenthaler JA. Elevated breast cancer mortality in women younger than age 40 years compared with older women is attributed to poorer survival in early-stage disease. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:341–7.CrossRef Gnerlich JL, Deshpande AD, Jeffe DB, Sweet A, White N, Margenthaler JA. Elevated breast cancer mortality in women younger than age 40 years compared with older women is attributed to poorer survival in early-stage disease. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:341–7.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Riedl CC, Slobod E, Jochelson M, Morrow M, Goldman DA, Gonen M, et al. Retrospective analysis of 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging asymptomatic breast cancer patients younger than 40 years. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1578–83.CrossRef Riedl CC, Slobod E, Jochelson M, Morrow M, Goldman DA, Gonen M, et al. Retrospective analysis of 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging asymptomatic breast cancer patients younger than 40 years. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1578–83.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kim E-K, Noh WC, Han W, Noh D-Y. Prognostic significance of young age (<35 years) by subtype based on ER, PR, and HER2 status in breast cancer: a nationwide registry-based study. World J Surg. 2011;35:1244–53.CrossRef Kim E-K, Noh WC, Han W, Noh D-Y. Prognostic significance of young age (<35 years) by subtype based on ER, PR, and HER2 status in breast cancer: a nationwide registry-based study. World J Surg. 2011;35:1244–53.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Has Simsek D, Sanli Y, Kulle CB, Karanlik H, Kilic B, Kuyumcu S, et al. Correlation of 18F-FDG PET/CT with pathological features and survival in primary breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2017;38:694–700.CrossRef Has Simsek D, Sanli Y, Kulle CB, Karanlik H, Kilic B, Kuyumcu S, et al. Correlation of 18F-FDG PET/CT with pathological features and survival in primary breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2017;38:694–700.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Ahn SG, Lee M, Jeon TJ, Han K, Lee HM, Lee SA, et al. [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography can contribute to discriminate patients with poor prognosis in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(8):e105905.CrossRef Ahn SG, Lee M, Jeon TJ, Han K, Lee HM, Lee SA, et al. [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography can contribute to discriminate patients with poor prognosis in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(8):e105905.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Wallis MG. How do we manage overdiagnosis/overtreatment in breast screening? Clin Radiol. 2018;73:372–80.CrossRef Wallis MG. How do we manage overdiagnosis/overtreatment in breast screening? Clin Radiol. 2018;73:372–80.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11(11):2101–11.CrossRef Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11(11):2101–11.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Chilcott F, et al. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(8):1676–88.CrossRef Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Chilcott F, et al. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(8):1676–88.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Rousseau C, Devillers A, Sagan C, Ferrer L, Bridji B, Campion L, et al. Monitoring of early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III breast cancer by [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(34):3566–72.CrossRef Rousseau C, Devillers A, Sagan C, Ferrer L, Bridji B, Campion L, et al. Monitoring of early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III breast cancer by [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(34):3566–72.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Sasada S, Masumoto N, Goda N, Kajitani K, Emi A, Kadoya T, et al. Dedicated breast PET for detecting residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: a prospective cohort study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44:444–8.CrossRef Sasada S, Masumoto N, Goda N, Kajitani K, Emi A, Kadoya T, et al. Dedicated breast PET for detecting residual disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable breast cancer: a prospective cohort study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44:444–8.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C. Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1307–18.CrossRef Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C. Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1307–18.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Sugano K, Nakamura S, Ando J, Takayama S, Kamata H, Sekiguchi I, et al. Cross sectional analysis of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Japanese patients suspected to have hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Cancer Sci. 2008;99:1967–76.CrossRef Sugano K, Nakamura S, Ando J, Takayama S, Kamata H, Sekiguchi I, et al. Cross sectional analysis of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in Japanese patients suspected to have hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Cancer Sci. 2008;99:1967–76.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Saslow E, Boetes C, Burke W, Harms S, Leach MO, Lehman CD, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57:75–89.CrossRef Saslow E, Boetes C, Burke W, Harms S, Leach MO, Lehman CD, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57:75–89.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Wang CL, MacDonald LR, Rogers JV, Aravkin A, Haseley DR, Beatty JD. Positron emission mammography: correlation of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and 18F-FDG. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(2):247–55.CrossRef Wang CL, MacDonald LR, Rogers JV, Aravkin A, Haseley DR, Beatty JD. Positron emission mammography: correlation of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and 18F-FDG. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(2):247–55.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Nakajima Y, Okuda I, Tozaki M, Isomoto I. Guidelines for breast MRI screening for groups at high risk for breast cancer, Ver. 1.2 (Japan Association of Breast Cancer Screening, MRI Screening Review Committee). Nihon Nyugan Kenshin Gakkaishi. 2013;22(2):155–76. Nakajima Y, Okuda I, Tozaki M, Isomoto I. Guidelines for breast MRI screening for groups at high risk for breast cancer, Ver. 1.2 (Japan Association of Breast Cancer Screening, MRI Screening Review Committee). Nihon Nyugan Kenshin Gakkaishi. 2013;22(2):155–76.
35.
go back to reference Guidelines for performing PET examinations using in-house manufactured FDG (2nd edition) (Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine). Nucl Med 2005; 42(4):1–22. Guidelines for performing PET examinations using in-house manufactured FDG (2nd edition) (Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine). Nucl Med 2005; 42(4):1–22.
Metadata
Title
Clinical practice guidelines for high-resolution breast PET, 2019 edition
Authors
Yoko Satoh
Masami Kawamoto
Kazunori Kubota
Koji Murakami
Makoto Hosono
Michio Senda
Masayuki Sasaki
Toshimitsu Momose
Kengo Ito
Terue Okamura
Keiichi Oda
Yuji Kuge
Minoru Sakurai
Ukihide Tateishi
Yasuhisa Fujibayashi
Yasuhiro Magata
Takeshi Yoshida
Atsuo Waki
Katsuhiko Kato
Teisuke Hashimoto
Mayuki Uchiyama
Seigo Kinuya
Tatsuya Higashi
Yasuhiro Magata
Akihiro Machitori
Hirotaka Maruno
Ryogo Minamimoto
Keiichiro Yoshinaga
Publication date
01-03-2021
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Published in
Annals of Nuclear Medicine / Issue 3/2021
Print ISSN: 0914-7187
Electronic ISSN: 1864-6433
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-021-01582-y

Other articles of this Issue 3/2021

Annals of Nuclear Medicine 3/2021 Go to the issue