Molecular imaging for the characterization of breast tumors

References

• Bone B, Wiberg MK, Parrado C, et al. Mechanism of contrast enhancement in breast lesions at MR imaging. Acta Radiol 1998;39(5):494-500
   Google Scholar
• Buckley DL, Drew PJ, Mussurakis S, et al. Microvessel density of invasive breast cancer assessed by dynamic Gd-DTPA enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7(3):461-4
   Google Scholar
• Helbich TH. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast. Eur J Radiol 2000;34(3):208-19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilmes LJ, Pallavicini MG, Fleming LM, et al. AG-013736, a novel inhibitor of VEGF receptor tyrosine kinases, inhibits breast cancer growth and decreases vascular permeability as detected by dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25(3):319-27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging - Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 2007;244(2):356-78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhl CK. Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. Radiology 2007;244(3):672-91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinker K, Grabner G, Bogner W, et al. A combined high temporal and high spatial resolution 3 Tesla MR imaging protocol for the assessment of breast lesions: initial results. Invest Radiol 2009;44(9):553-8
   Google Scholar
• Kuhl CK. Breast MR imaging at 3T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2007;15(3):315-20. vi
   Google Scholar
• Sardanelli F, Boetes C, Borisch B, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: recommendations from the EUSOMA working group. Eur J Cancer 2010;46(8):1296-316
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinkel K, Helbich TH, Esserman LJ, et al. Dynamic high-spatial-resolution MR imaging of suspicious breast lesions: diagnostic criteria and interobserver variability. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175(1):35-43
   Google Scholar
• Kuhl CK, Schild HH, Morakkabati N. Dynamic bilateral contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast: trade-off between spatial and temporal resolution. Radiology 2005;236(3):789-800
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turnbull LW. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the diagnosis and management of breast cancer. NMR Biomed 2008;22(1):28-39
   Google Scholar
• Goto M, Ito H, Akazawa K, et al. Diagnosis of breast tumors by contrast-enhanced MR imaging: comparison between the diagnostic performance of dynamic enhancement patterns and morphologic features. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25(1):104-12
   Google Scholar
• Veltman J, Stoutjesdijk M, Mann R, et al. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of the breast: the value of pharmacokinetic parameters derived from fast dynamic imaging during initial enhancement in classifying lesions. Eur Radiol 2008;18(6):1123-33
   Google Scholar
• Kuhl CK, Jost P, Morakkabati N, et al. Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast at 3.0 and 1.5 T in the same patients: initial experience. Radiology 2006;239(3):666-76
   Google Scholar
• Lourenco AP, Donegan L, Khalil H, Mainiero MB. Improving outcomes of screening breast MRI with practice evolution: initial clinical experience with 3T compared to 1.5T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013. [Epub ahead of print]
   Google Scholar
• Pinker-Domenig K, Bogner W, Gruber S, et al. High resolution MRI of the breast at 3 T: which BI-RADS(R) descriptors are most strongly associated with the diagnosis of breast cancer? Eur Radiol 2012;22(2):322-30
   Google Scholar
• van de Bank BL, Voogt IJ, Italiaander M, et al. Ultra high spatial and temporal resolution breast imaging at 7T. NMR Biomed 2012. [Epub ahead of print]
   Google Scholar
• Korteweg MA, Veldhuis WB, Visser F, et al. Feasibility of 7 Tesla breast magnetic resonance imaging determination of intrinsic sensitivity and high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion-weighted imaging, and (1)H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy of breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Invest Radiol 2011;46(6):370-6
   Google Scholar
• Klomp DW, van de Bank BL, Raaijmakers A, et al. 31P MRSI and 1H MRS at 7 T: initial results in human breast cancer. NMR Biomed 2011;24(10):1337-42
   Google Scholar
• Stehouwer BL, Klomp DW, Korteweg MA, et al. 7 T versus 3T contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging of invasive ductulolobular carcinoma: first clinical experience. Magn Reson Imaging 2013;31(4):613-17
   Google Scholar
• Pinker K, Bogner W, Baltzer P, et al. Clinical application of bilateral high temporal and spatial resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging of the breast at 7T. Eur Radiol 2013. [Epub ahead of print]
   Google Scholar
• Wenkel E, Geppert C, Schulz-Wendtland R, et al. Diffusion weighted Imaging in breast MRI: comparison of two different pulse sequences. Acad Radiol 2007;14(9):1077-83
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsubayashi RN, Fujii T, Yasumori K, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient in invasive ductal breast carcinoma: correlation with detailed histologic features and the enhancement ratio on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images. J Oncol 2010;2010:821048
   Google Scholar
• Frangioni JV. New technologies for human cancer imaging. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(24):4012-21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogner W PK, Gruber S, Grabner G, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI for differentiation of breast lesions at 3.0 Tesla: how does selection of diffusion schemes affect diagnosis? Radiology 2009;253(2):341-51
   Google Scholar
• Thomassin-Naggara I, De Bazelaire C, Chopier J, et al. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of the breast: advantages and pitfalls. Eur J Radiol 2013;82(3):435-43
   Google Scholar
• Marini C, Iacconi C, Giannelli M, et al. Quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesion. Eur Radiol 2007;17(10):2646-55
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogner W PK, Gruber S, Grabner G, et al. High-field diffusion-weighted imaging for improved differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. RSNA; Chicago, IL, USA: 2008
   Google Scholar
• Guo Y, Cai YQ, Cai ZL, et al. Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16(2):172-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yankeelov TE, Lepage M, Chakravarthy A, et al. Integration of quantitative DCE-MRI and ADC mapping to monitor treatment response in human breast cancer: initial results. Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25(1):1-13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodhams R, Matsunaga K, Iwabuchi K, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of malignant breast tumors - The usefulness of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and ADC map for the detection of malignant breast tumors and evaluation of cancer extension. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2005;29(5):644-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martincich L, Deantoni V, Bertotto I, et al. Correlations between diffusion-weighted imaging and breast cancer biomarkers. Eur Radiol 2012;22(7):1519-28
   Google Scholar
• Pinker K, Bickel H, Helbich TH, et al. Combined contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance and diffusion-weighted imaging reading adapted to the “breast imaging reporting and data system” for multiparametric 3-T imaging of breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2013;23(7):1791-802
   Google Scholar
• Gruber S, Debski BK, Pinker K, et al. Three-dimensional proton MR spectroscopic imaging at 3 T for the differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. Radiology 2011;261(3):752-61
   Google Scholar
• Baltzer PA, Dietzel M. Breast Lesions: diagnosis by Using Proton MR Spectroscopy at 1.5 and 3.0 T – Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Radiology 2013;267(3):735-46
   Google Scholar
• Bartella L, Huang W. Proton (1H) MR spectroscopy of the breast. Radiographics 2007;27(Suppl 1):S241-52
   Google Scholar
• Bartella L, Smith CS, Dershaw DD, Liberman L. Imaging breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45(1):45-67
   Google Scholar
• Tozaki M. Proton MR spectroscopy of the breast. Breast Cancer 2008;15(3):218-23
   Google Scholar
• Meisamy S, Bolan PJ, Baker EH, et al. Adding in vivo quantitative 1H MR spectroscopy to improve diagnostic accuracy of breast MR imaging: preliminary results of observer performance study at 4.0 T. Radiology 2005;236(2):465-75
   Google Scholar
• Chen X, Li WL, Zhang YL, et al. Meta-analysis of quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. BMC Cancer 2010;10:693
   Google Scholar
• Kul S, Cansu A, Alhan E, et al. Contribution of diffusion-weighted imaging to dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the characterization of breast tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196(1):210-17
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ei Khouli RH, Jacobs MA, Mezban SD, et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging improves the diagnostic accuracy of conventional 3.0-T breast MR imaging. Radiology 2010;256(1):64-73
   Google Scholar
• Pinker K, Bogner W, Baltzer P, et al. Improved diagnostic accuracy with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the breast using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging and 3D proton MR spectroscopic imaging. Invest Radiol 2013; In press
   Google Scholar
• Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US–diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 1998;207(1):191-9
   Google Scholar
• Aktolun C, Bayhan H, Kir M. Clinical experience with Tc-99m MIBI imaging in patients with malignant tumors. Preliminary results and comparison with Tl-201. Clin Nucl Med 1992;17(3):171-6
   Google Scholar
• Kao CH, Wang SJ, Liu TJ. The use of technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile breast scintigraphy to evaluate palpable breast masses. Eur J Nucl Med 1994;21(5):432-6
   Google Scholar
• Khalkhali I, Mena I, Diggles L. Review of imaging techniques for the diagnosis of breast cancer: a new role of prone scintimammography using technetium-99m sestamibi. Eur J Nucl Med 1994;21(4):357-62
   Google Scholar
• Becherer A, Helbich T, Staudenherz A, et al. The diagnostic value of planar and SPET scintimammography in different age groups. Nucl Med Commun 1997;18(8):710-18
   Google Scholar
• Taillefer R. Clinical applications of 99mTc-sestamibi scintimammography. Semin Nucl Med 2005;35(2):100-15
   Google Scholar
• Sun SS, Hsieh JF, Tsai SC, et al. The role of technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile scintimammography in diagnosis of breast cancer in patients with mammographically dense breasts. Anticancer Res 2000;20(5C):3755-8
   Google Scholar
• Arslan N, Ozturk E, Ilgan S, et al. 99Tcm-MIBI scintimammography in the evaluation of breast lesions and axillary involvement: a comparison with mammography and histopathological diagnosis. Nucl Med Commun 1999;20(4):317-25
   Google Scholar
• Maffioli L, Agresti R, Chiti A, et al. Prone scintimammography in patients with non-palpable breast lesions. Anticancer Res 1996;16(3A):1269-73
   Google Scholar
• Scopinaro F, Schillaci O, Ussof W, et al. A three center study on the diagnostic accuracy of 99mTc-MIBI scintimammography. Anticancer Res 1997;17(3B):1631-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brem RF, Rapelyea JA, Zisman G, et al. Occult breast cancer: scintimammography with high-resolution breast-specific gamma camera in women at high risk for breast cancer. Radiology 2005;237(1):274-80
   Google Scholar
• Brem RF, Fishman M, Rapelyea JA. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ with mammography, breast specific gamma imaging, and magnetic resonance imaging: a comparative study. Acad Radiol 2007;14(8):945-50
   Google Scholar
• Coover LR, Caravaglia G, Kuhn P. Scintimammography with dedicated breast camera detects and localizes occult carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2004;45(4):553-8
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes DJ, O'Connor MK, Phillips SW, et al. Molecular breast imaging: a new technique using technetium Tc 99m scintimammography to detect small tumors of the breast. Mayo Clin Proc 2005;80(1):24-30
   Google Scholar
• Brem RF, Floerke AC, Rapelyea JA, et al. Breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct imaging modality for the diagnosis of breast cancer. Radiology 2008;247(3):651-7
   Google Scholar
• Brem RF, Shahan C, Rapleyea JA, et al. Detection of occult foci of breast cancer using breast-specific gamma imaging in women with one mammographic or clinically suspicious breast lesion. Acad Radiol 2010;17(6):735-43
   Google Scholar
• Sun Y, Wei W, Yang HW, Liu JL. Clinical usefulness of breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality to mammography for diagnosis of breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013;40(3):450-63
   Google Scholar
• Avril N, Adler LP. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging for primary breast cancer and loco-regional staging. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45(4):645-57. vi
   Google Scholar
• Quon A, Gambhir SS. FDG-PET and beyond: molecular breast cancer imaging. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(8):1664-73
   Google Scholar
• Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol 2000;18(20):3495-502
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar R, Lal N, Alavi A. 18F-FDG PET in detecting primary breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2007;48(10):1751; author reply 1752
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Mourtzikos KA, et al. Initial experience with FDG-PET/CT in the evaluation of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33(3):254-62
   Google Scholar
• Escalona S, Blasco JA, Reza MM, et al. A systematic review of FDG-PET in breast cancer. Med Oncol 2010;27(1):114-29
   Google Scholar
• Rosen EL, Eubank WB, Mankoff DA. FDG PET, PET/CT, and breast cancer imaging. Radiographics 2007;27(Suppl 1):S215-29
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Avril N, Sassen S, Roylance R. Response to therapy in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2009;50(Suppl 1):55S-63S
   Google Scholar
• Samson DJ, Flamm CR, Pisano ED, Aronson N. Should FDG PET be used to decide whether a patient with an abnormal mammogram or breast finding at physical examination should undergo biopsy? Acad Radiol 2002;9(7):773-83
   Google Scholar
• Murthy K, Aznar M, Thompson CJ, et al. Results of preliminary clinical trials of the positron emission mammography system PEM-I: a dedicated breast imaging system producing glucose metabolic images using FDG. J Nucl Med 2000;41(11):1851-8
   Google Scholar
• Levine EA, Freimanis RI, Perrier ND, et al. Positron emission mammography: initial clinical results. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10(1):86-91
   Google Scholar
• Tafra L, Cheng Z, Uddo J, et al. Pilot clinical trial of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission mammography in the surgical management of breast cancer. Am J Surg 2005;190(4):628-32
   Google Scholar
• Berg WA, Weinberg IN, Narayanan D, et al. High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression (“positron emission mammography”) is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer. Breast J 2006;12(4):309-23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eo JS, Chun IK, Paeng JC, et al. Imaging sensitivity of dedicated positron emission mammography in relation to tumor size. Breast 2012;21(1):66-71
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hruska CB, O'Connor MK. Nuclear imaging of the breast: translating achievements in instrumentation into clinical use. Med Phys 2013;40(5):050901
   Google Scholar
• Koolen BB, Vogel WV, Vrancken Peeters MJ, et al. Molecular imaging in breast cancer: from whole-body PET/CT to dedicated breast PET. J Oncol 2012;2012:438647
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kalinyak JE, Berg WA, Schilling K, et al. Breast cancer detection using high-resolution breast PET compared to whole-body PET or PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014;41(2):260-75
   Google Scholar
• Kalles V, Zografos GC, Provatopoulou X, et al. The current status of positron emission mammography in breast cancer diagnosis. Breast Cancer 2013;20(2):123-30
   Google Scholar
• Morris EA. Diagnostic breast MR imaging: current status and future directions. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45(5):863-80. vii
   Google Scholar
• Zytoon AA, Murakami K, El-Kholy MR, El-Shorbagy E. Dual time point FDG-PET/CT imaging. Potential tool for diagnosis of breast cancer. Clin Radiol 2008;63(11):1213-27
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moy L, Ponzo F, Noz ME, et al. Improving specificity of breast MRI using prone PET and fused MRI and PET 3D volume datasets. J Nucl Med 2007;48(4):528-37
   Google Scholar
• Wehrl HF, Sauter AW, Judenhofer MS, Pichler BJ. Combined PET/MR imaging–technology and applications. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2010;9(1):5-20
   Google Scholar
• Judenhofer MS, Wehrl HF, Newport DF, et al. Simultaneous PET-MRI: a new approach for functional and morphological imaging. Nat Med 2008;14(4):459-65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yutani K, Tatsumi M, Uehara T, Nishimura T. Effect of patients' being prone during FDG PET for the diagnosis of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;173(5):1337-9
   Google Scholar
• Domingues RC, Carneiro MP, Lopes FC, et al. Whole-body MRI and FDG PET fused images for evaluation of patients with cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192(4):1012-20
   Google Scholar
• Pinker K, Bickel H, Magometschnigg H, et al. Molecular imaging of breast tumours with PET-MRI – proof of concept. ISMRM 2011, European Journal of Cancer; Montreal, Canada: 2011
   Google Scholar
• Mintun MA, Welch MJ, Siegel BA, et al. Breast cancer: PET imaging of estrogen receptors. Radiology 1988;169(1):45-8
   Google Scholar
• Yang Z, Sun Y, Xue J, et al. Can positron emission tomography/computed tomography with the dual tracers fluorine-18 fluoroestradiol and fluorodeoxyglucose predict neoadjuvant chemotherapy response of breast cancer? a pilot study. PLoS One 2013;8(10):e78192
   Google Scholar
• Cheng J, Lei L, Xu J, et al. 18F-fluoromisonidazole PET/CT: a potential tool for predicting primary endocrine therapy resistance in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2013;54(3):333-40
   Google Scholar
• Whisenant JG, Peterson TE, Fluckiger JU, et al. Reproducibility of static and dynamic (18)F-FDG, (18)F-FLT, and (18)F-FMISO MicroPET studies in a murine model of HER2+ breast cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2013;15(1):87-96
   Google Scholar
• Imbriaco M, Caprio MG, Limite G, et al. Dual-time-point 18F-FDG PET/CT versus dynamic breast MRI of suspicious breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;191(5):1323-30
   Google Scholar
• van de Wiele C, Lahorte C, Vermeersch H, et al. Quantitative tumor apoptosis imaging using technetium-99m-HYNIC Annexin V single photon emission computed tomography. J Clin Oncol 2003;21(18):3483-7
   Google Scholar
• Rajendran JG, Wilson DC, Conrad EU, et al. [(18)F]FMISO and [(18)F]FDG PET imaging in soft tissue sarcomas: correlation of hypoxia, metabolism and VEGF expression. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30(5):695-704
   Google Scholar
• Vera P, Bohn P, Edet-Sanson A, et al. Simultaneous positron emission tomography (PET) assessment of metabolism with (1)(8)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose (FDG), proliferation with (1)(8)F-fluoro-thymidine (FLT), and hypoxia with (1)(8)fluoro-misonidazole (F-miso) before and during radiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a pilot study. Radiother Oncol 2011;98(1):109-16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ouwerkerk R, Jacobs MA, Macura KJ, et al. Elevated tissue sodium concentration in malignant breast lesions detected with non-invasive 23Na MRI. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007;106(2):151-60
   Google Scholar
• Cameron IL, Smith NK, Pool TB, Sparks RL. Intracellular concentration of sodium and other elements as related to mitogenesis and oncogenesis in vivo. Cancer Res 1980;40(5):1493-500
   Google Scholar
• Ackerstaff E, Pflug BR, Nelson JB, Bhujwalla ZM. Detection of increased choline compounds with proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy subsequent to malignant transformation of human prostatic epithelial cells. Cancer Res 2001;61(9):3599-603
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barzilai A, Horowitz A, Geier A, Degani H. Phosphate metabolites and steroid hormone receptors of benign and malignant breast tumors. a nuclear magnetic resonance study. Cancer 1991;67(11):2919-25
   Google Scholar
• Arias-Mendoza F, Zakian K, Schwartz A, et al. Methodological standardization for a multi-institutional in vivo trial of localized 31P MR spectroscopy in human cancer research. In vitro and normal volunteer studies. NMR Biomed 2004;17(6):382-91
   Google Scholar
• Abramson RG, Arlinghaus LR, Weis JA, et al. Current and emerging quantitative magnetic resonance imaging methods for assessing and predicting the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant therapy. Breast cancer 2012;2012(4):139-54
   Google Scholar
• Keshari KR, Sriram R, Koelsch BL, et al. Hyperpolarized 13C-pyruvate magnetic resonance reveals rapid lactate export in metastatic renal cell carcinomas. Cancer Res 2013;73(2):529-38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurhanewicz J, Vigneron DB, Brindle K, et al. Analysis of cancer metabolism by imaging hyperpolarized nuclei: prospects for translation to clinical research. Neoplasia 2011;13(2):81-97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brindle KM, Bohndiek SE, Gallagher FA, Kettunen MI. Tumor imaging using hyperpolarized 13C magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Magn Reson Med 2011;66(2):505-19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar