Loading…
Comparison of [99mTc]3PRGD2 Imaging and [18F]FDG PET/CT in Breast Cancer and Expression of Integrin αvβ3 in Breast Cancer Vascular Endothelial Cells
Purpose This study aimed to investigate the value of 99m technetium-three polyethylene glycol spacers-arginine-glycine-aspartic acid ([ 99m Tc]3PRGD 2 ) imaging in diagnosis and staging of breast cancer compared with 2-deoxy-2-[ 18 F]fluoro-D-glucose ([ 18 F]FDG) imaging, and to explore the expressi...
Saved in:
Published in: | Molecular imaging and biology 2018-10, Vol.20 (5), p.846-856 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c264y-673340b899da8f6c6ed6783bfe21dd3152b35b8aef95b799a1608a32fbbe820f3 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c264y-673340b899da8f6c6ed6783bfe21dd3152b35b8aef95b799a1608a32fbbe820f3 |
container_end_page | 856 |
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 846 |
container_title | Molecular imaging and biology |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Chen, Zhenying Fu, Fangmeng Li, Fang Zhu, Zhaohui Yang, Yinghong Chen, Xiangjin Jia, Bing Zheng, Shan Huang, Chao Miao, Weibing |
description | Purpose
This study aimed to investigate the value of
99m
technetium-three polyethylene glycol spacers-arginine-glycine-aspartic acid ([
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
) imaging in diagnosis and staging of breast cancer compared with 2-deoxy-2-[
18
F]fluoro-D-glucose ([
18
F]FDG) imaging, and to explore the expression of integrin α
v
β
3
in tumor vascular endothelial cells.
Procedures
Forty-two women with suspected breast cancer underwent both [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and [
18
F]FDG imaging. Visual analysis was used to assess primary breast lesion, axillary lymph node, and distant metastasis. The tumor-blood (T/B) ratios from [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) from [
18
F]FDG imaging were analyzed for breast lesions. Integrin α
v
β
3
was analyzed through immunohistochemistry.
Results
Forty-five breast lesions were found (malignant,
n
= 38; benign,
n
= 7). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG imaging in visual analysis for the breast lesion were 97.4, 87.5, and 95.6 % and 97.4, 71.4, and 93.3 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). For semi-quantitative analysis, no significant difference of the area under the curves (AUC) was found in the imaging using the two radiopharmaceuticals (0.880 and 0.955;
Z
= 0.88,
P
> 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for axillary lymph node metastasis with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG were 78.05, 99.36, and 94.92 % and 85.37, 98.72, and 95.64 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). Nine patients with distant metastases were all detected with the two radiopharmaceuticals. The expression of integrin α
v
β
3
was correlated with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
uptake (
r
= 0.582,
P
= 0.001), which were significantly higher in the HER2-positive and stage III–IV patients (
P
|
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11307-018-1178-y |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2010371771</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2009515216</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c264y-673340b899da8f6c6ed6783bfe21dd3152b35b8aef95b799a1608a32fbbe820f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFOGzEQhq0KpELoA_RmqRcuS2Zs1vYe2yUJkZCIqrQXhCzvrjddtOsNdoLIi_Ae8CA8E04XqVKrnmYO3__Pr_kJ-YxwhgByHBA5yARQJYhSJbsP5AiVgIQBsIO4p1wkKDj7SI5DuANAiYwfkae879bGN6F3tK_pTZZ1y_KWL77PLhidd2bVuBU1rqI3qKa304sZXUyW43xJG0e_eWvChubGldb_hiaPa29DaAazudvYlY_g6_PD6wv_V_LThHLbGk8nruo3v2zbmJbmtm3DCTmsTRvsp_c5Ij-mk2V-mVxdz-b516ukZOJ8lwjJ-TkUKssqo2pRClsJqXhRW4ZVxTFlBU8LZWydpYXMMoMClOGsLgqrGNR8RE4H37Xv77c2bHTXhDImMM7226AZIHCJUmJEv_yF3vVb72K6SEGWxmPxvyOCA1X6PgRva732TWf8TiPofVN6aErHpvS-Kb2LGjZoQmTdyvo_zv8XvQEQzpYn</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2009515216</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of [99mTc]3PRGD2 Imaging and [18F]FDG PET/CT in Breast Cancer and Expression of Integrin αvβ3 in Breast Cancer Vascular Endothelial Cells</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Chen, Zhenying ; Fu, Fangmeng ; Li, Fang ; Zhu, Zhaohui ; Yang, Yinghong ; Chen, Xiangjin ; Jia, Bing ; Zheng, Shan ; Huang, Chao ; Miao, Weibing</creator><creatorcontrib>Chen, Zhenying ; Fu, Fangmeng ; Li, Fang ; Zhu, Zhaohui ; Yang, Yinghong ; Chen, Xiangjin ; Jia, Bing ; Zheng, Shan ; Huang, Chao ; Miao, Weibing</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
This study aimed to investigate the value of
99m
technetium-three polyethylene glycol spacers-arginine-glycine-aspartic acid ([
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
) imaging in diagnosis and staging of breast cancer compared with 2-deoxy-2-[
18
F]fluoro-D-glucose ([
18
F]FDG) imaging, and to explore the expression of integrin α
v
β
3
in tumor vascular endothelial cells.
Procedures
Forty-two women with suspected breast cancer underwent both [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and [
18
F]FDG imaging. Visual analysis was used to assess primary breast lesion, axillary lymph node, and distant metastasis. The tumor-blood (T/B) ratios from [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) from [
18
F]FDG imaging were analyzed for breast lesions. Integrin α
v
β
3
was analyzed through immunohistochemistry.
Results
Forty-five breast lesions were found (malignant,
n
= 38; benign,
n
= 7). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG imaging in visual analysis for the breast lesion were 97.4, 87.5, and 95.6 % and 97.4, 71.4, and 93.3 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). For semi-quantitative analysis, no significant difference of the area under the curves (AUC) was found in the imaging using the two radiopharmaceuticals (0.880 and 0.955;
Z
= 0.88,
P
> 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for axillary lymph node metastasis with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG were 78.05, 99.36, and 94.92 % and 85.37, 98.72, and 95.64 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). Nine patients with distant metastases were all detected with the two radiopharmaceuticals. The expression of integrin α
v
β
3
was correlated with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
uptake (
r
= 0.582,
P
= 0.001), which were significantly higher in the HER2-positive and stage III–IV patients (
P
< 0.05).
Conclusions
The prospective study demonstrated that [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging seems to be valuable for diagnosis of breast cancer and its staging. It may be less sensitive for detecting small lymph node metastatic lesions when compared with [
18
F]FDG imaging. Integrin α
v
β
3
in tumor microvessels was associated with the breast cancer subtype and its staging.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1536-1632</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1860-2002</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11307-018-1178-y</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Arginine ; Aspartic acid ; Biopsy ; Breast cancer ; Cancer ; Computed tomography ; Diagnosis ; Endothelial cells ; ErbB-2 protein ; Fluorine isotopes ; Glucose ; Glycine ; Imaging ; Immunohistochemistry ; Lesions ; Lymph ; Lymph nodes ; Lymphatic system ; Mammography ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Metastases ; Metastasis ; Patients ; Polyethylene glycol ; Polyethylene terephthalate ; Quantitative analysis ; Radiology ; Research Article ; Sensitivity</subject><ispartof>Molecular imaging and biology, 2018-10, Vol.20 (5), p.846-856</ispartof><rights>World Molecular Imaging Society 2018</rights><rights>Molecular Imaging and Biology is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c264y-673340b899da8f6c6ed6783bfe21dd3152b35b8aef95b799a1608a32fbbe820f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c264y-673340b899da8f6c6ed6783bfe21dd3152b35b8aef95b799a1608a32fbbe820f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27900,27901</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chen, Zhenying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fu, Fangmeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Zhaohui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Yinghong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xiangjin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jia, Bing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zheng, Shan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Chao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miao, Weibing</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of [99mTc]3PRGD2 Imaging and [18F]FDG PET/CT in Breast Cancer and Expression of Integrin αvβ3 in Breast Cancer Vascular Endothelial Cells</title><title>Molecular imaging and biology</title><addtitle>Mol Imaging Biol</addtitle><description>Purpose
This study aimed to investigate the value of
99m
technetium-three polyethylene glycol spacers-arginine-glycine-aspartic acid ([
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
) imaging in diagnosis and staging of breast cancer compared with 2-deoxy-2-[
18
F]fluoro-D-glucose ([
18
F]FDG) imaging, and to explore the expression of integrin α
v
β
3
in tumor vascular endothelial cells.
Procedures
Forty-two women with suspected breast cancer underwent both [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and [
18
F]FDG imaging. Visual analysis was used to assess primary breast lesion, axillary lymph node, and distant metastasis. The tumor-blood (T/B) ratios from [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) from [
18
F]FDG imaging were analyzed for breast lesions. Integrin α
v
β
3
was analyzed through immunohistochemistry.
Results
Forty-five breast lesions were found (malignant,
n
= 38; benign,
n
= 7). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG imaging in visual analysis for the breast lesion were 97.4, 87.5, and 95.6 % and 97.4, 71.4, and 93.3 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). For semi-quantitative analysis, no significant difference of the area under the curves (AUC) was found in the imaging using the two radiopharmaceuticals (0.880 and 0.955;
Z
= 0.88,
P
> 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for axillary lymph node metastasis with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG were 78.05, 99.36, and 94.92 % and 85.37, 98.72, and 95.64 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). Nine patients with distant metastases were all detected with the two radiopharmaceuticals. The expression of integrin α
v
β
3
was correlated with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
uptake (
r
= 0.582,
P
= 0.001), which were significantly higher in the HER2-positive and stage III–IV patients (
P
< 0.05).
Conclusions
The prospective study demonstrated that [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging seems to be valuable for diagnosis of breast cancer and its staging. It may be less sensitive for detecting small lymph node metastatic lesions when compared with [
18
F]FDG imaging. Integrin α
v
β
3
in tumor microvessels was associated with the breast cancer subtype and its staging.</description><subject>Arginine</subject><subject>Aspartic acid</subject><subject>Biopsy</subject><subject>Breast cancer</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Endothelial cells</subject><subject>ErbB-2 protein</subject><subject>Fluorine isotopes</subject><subject>Glucose</subject><subject>Glycine</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Immunohistochemistry</subject><subject>Lesions</subject><subject>Lymph</subject><subject>Lymph nodes</subject><subject>Lymphatic system</subject><subject>Mammography</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Metastases</subject><subject>Metastasis</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Polyethylene glycol</subject><subject>Polyethylene terephthalate</subject><subject>Quantitative analysis</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Research Article</subject><subject>Sensitivity</subject><issn>1536-1632</issn><issn>1860-2002</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kcFOGzEQhq0KpELoA_RmqRcuS2Zs1vYe2yUJkZCIqrQXhCzvrjddtOsNdoLIi_Ae8CA8E04XqVKrnmYO3__Pr_kJ-YxwhgByHBA5yARQJYhSJbsP5AiVgIQBsIO4p1wkKDj7SI5DuANAiYwfkae879bGN6F3tK_pTZZ1y_KWL77PLhidd2bVuBU1rqI3qKa304sZXUyW43xJG0e_eWvChubGldb_hiaPa29DaAazudvYlY_g6_PD6wv_V_LThHLbGk8nruo3v2zbmJbmtm3DCTmsTRvsp_c5Ij-mk2V-mVxdz-b516ukZOJ8lwjJ-TkUKssqo2pRClsJqXhRW4ZVxTFlBU8LZWydpYXMMoMClOGsLgqrGNR8RE4H37Xv77c2bHTXhDImMM7226AZIHCJUmJEv_yF3vVb72K6SEGWxmPxvyOCA1X6PgRva732TWf8TiPofVN6aErHpvS-Kb2LGjZoQmTdyvo_zv8XvQEQzpYn</recordid><startdate>20181001</startdate><enddate>20181001</enddate><creator>Chen, Zhenying</creator><creator>Fu, Fangmeng</creator><creator>Li, Fang</creator><creator>Zhu, Zhaohui</creator><creator>Yang, Yinghong</creator><creator>Chen, Xiangjin</creator><creator>Jia, Bing</creator><creator>Zheng, Shan</creator><creator>Huang, Chao</creator><creator>Miao, Weibing</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGLB</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181001</creationdate><title>Comparison of [99mTc]3PRGD2 Imaging and [18F]FDG PET/CT in Breast Cancer and Expression of Integrin αvβ3 in Breast Cancer Vascular Endothelial Cells</title><author>Chen, Zhenying ; Fu, Fangmeng ; Li, Fang ; Zhu, Zhaohui ; Yang, Yinghong ; Chen, Xiangjin ; Jia, Bing ; Zheng, Shan ; Huang, Chao ; Miao, Weibing</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c264y-673340b899da8f6c6ed6783bfe21dd3152b35b8aef95b799a1608a32fbbe820f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Arginine</topic><topic>Aspartic acid</topic><topic>Biopsy</topic><topic>Breast cancer</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Endothelial cells</topic><topic>ErbB-2 protein</topic><topic>Fluorine isotopes</topic><topic>Glucose</topic><topic>Glycine</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Immunohistochemistry</topic><topic>Lesions</topic><topic>Lymph</topic><topic>Lymph nodes</topic><topic>Lymphatic system</topic><topic>Mammography</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Metastases</topic><topic>Metastasis</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Polyethylene glycol</topic><topic>Polyethylene terephthalate</topic><topic>Quantitative analysis</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Research Article</topic><topic>Sensitivity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chen, Zhenying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fu, Fangmeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Zhaohui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Yinghong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xiangjin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jia, Bing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zheng, Shan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Huang, Chao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miao, Weibing</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Molecular imaging and biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chen, Zhenying</au><au>Fu, Fangmeng</au><au>Li, Fang</au><au>Zhu, Zhaohui</au><au>Yang, Yinghong</au><au>Chen, Xiangjin</au><au>Jia, Bing</au><au>Zheng, Shan</au><au>Huang, Chao</au><au>Miao, Weibing</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of [99mTc]3PRGD2 Imaging and [18F]FDG PET/CT in Breast Cancer and Expression of Integrin αvβ3 in Breast Cancer Vascular Endothelial Cells</atitle><jtitle>Molecular imaging and biology</jtitle><stitle>Mol Imaging Biol</stitle><date>2018-10-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>846</spage><epage>856</epage><pages>846-856</pages><issn>1536-1632</issn><eissn>1860-2002</eissn><abstract>Purpose
This study aimed to investigate the value of
99m
technetium-three polyethylene glycol spacers-arginine-glycine-aspartic acid ([
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
) imaging in diagnosis and staging of breast cancer compared with 2-deoxy-2-[
18
F]fluoro-D-glucose ([
18
F]FDG) imaging, and to explore the expression of integrin α
v
β
3
in tumor vascular endothelial cells.
Procedures
Forty-two women with suspected breast cancer underwent both [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and [
18
F]FDG imaging. Visual analysis was used to assess primary breast lesion, axillary lymph node, and distant metastasis. The tumor-blood (T/B) ratios from [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging and the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) from [
18
F]FDG imaging were analyzed for breast lesions. Integrin α
v
β
3
was analyzed through immunohistochemistry.
Results
Forty-five breast lesions were found (malignant,
n
= 38; benign,
n
= 7). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG imaging in visual analysis for the breast lesion were 97.4, 87.5, and 95.6 % and 97.4, 71.4, and 93.3 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). For semi-quantitative analysis, no significant difference of the area under the curves (AUC) was found in the imaging using the two radiopharmaceuticals (0.880 and 0.955;
Z
= 0.88,
P
> 0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for axillary lymph node metastasis with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
and [
18
F]FDG were 78.05, 99.36, and 94.92 % and 85.37, 98.72, and 95.64 %, respectively (
P
> 0.05). Nine patients with distant metastases were all detected with the two radiopharmaceuticals. The expression of integrin α
v
β
3
was correlated with [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
uptake (
r
= 0.582,
P
= 0.001), which were significantly higher in the HER2-positive and stage III–IV patients (
P
< 0.05).
Conclusions
The prospective study demonstrated that [
99m
Tc]3PRGD
2
imaging seems to be valuable for diagnosis of breast cancer and its staging. It may be less sensitive for detecting small lymph node metastatic lesions when compared with [
18
F]FDG imaging. Integrin α
v
β
3
in tumor microvessels was associated with the breast cancer subtype and its staging.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><doi>10.1007/s11307-018-1178-y</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1536-1632 |
ispartof | Molecular imaging and biology, 2018-10, Vol.20 (5), p.846-856 |
issn | 1536-1632 1860-2002 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2010371771 |
source | Springer Link |
subjects | Arginine Aspartic acid Biopsy Breast cancer Cancer Computed tomography Diagnosis Endothelial cells ErbB-2 protein Fluorine isotopes Glucose Glycine Imaging Immunohistochemistry Lesions Lymph Lymph nodes Lymphatic system Mammography Medicine Medicine & Public Health Metastases Metastasis Patients Polyethylene glycol Polyethylene terephthalate Quantitative analysis Radiology Research Article Sensitivity |
title | Comparison of [99mTc]3PRGD2 Imaging and [18F]FDG PET/CT in Breast Cancer and Expression of Integrin αvβ3 in Breast Cancer Vascular Endothelial Cells |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-24T10%3A26%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20%5B99mTc%5D3PRGD2%20Imaging%20and%20%5B18F%5DFDG%20PET/CT%20in%20Breast%20Cancer%20and%20Expression%20of%20Integrin%20%CE%B1v%CE%B23%20in%20Breast%20Cancer%20Vascular%20Endothelial%20Cells&rft.jtitle=Molecular%20imaging%20and%20biology&rft.au=Chen,%20Zhenying&rft.date=2018-10-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=846&rft.epage=856&rft.pages=846-856&rft.issn=1536-1632&rft.eissn=1860-2002&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11307-018-1178-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2009515216%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c264y-673340b899da8f6c6ed6783bfe21dd3152b35b8aef95b799a1608a32fbbe820f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2009515216&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |