Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Breast Cancer
      • Clinical Trials
      • Immunotherapy: Facts and Hopes
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Clinical Cancer Research
Clinical Cancer Research
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Breast Cancer
      • Clinical Trials
      • Immunotherapy: Facts and Hopes
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose and 16alpha-[18F]fluoro-17beta-estradiol in breast cancer: correlation with estrogen receptor status and response to systemic therapy.

J E Mortimer, F Dehdashti, B A Siegel, J A Katzenellenbogen, P Fracasso and M J Welch
J E Mortimer
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
F Dehdashti
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
B A Siegel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J A Katzenellenbogen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
P Fracasso
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M J Welch
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI:  Published June 1996
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

We assessed the value of positron emission tomography (PET) with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) and 16alpha-[18F]fluoro-17beta-estradiol (FES) in women with breast cancer for predicting response to systemic therapy. Results of FES-PET were correlated with estrogen receptor (ER) status. Forty-three women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer underwent FDG-PET and FES-PET prior to institution of systemic therapy. All patients had measurable disease and had tumors submitted for ER determination. Cancers were considered functionally hormone sensitive if the standardized uptake value of the lesion on FES-PET was >/=1.0 (FES+) and hormone resistant if the standardized uptake value was <1.0 (FES-). Information obtained by FES-PET was compared with the results of ER assays. The tumor response to chemotherapy and hormonal therapy was correlated with intensity of uptake by both FDG-PET and FES-PET. The ER status of the breast cancers was negative (ER-) in 20 patients, positive (ER+) in 21 patients, and unknown in 2 patients. All 20 of the ER- tumors were also FES-. However, of the 21 ER+ tumors, 16 were FES+ and 5 were FES-. Thirty patients were treated initially with chemotherapy, and 21 (70%) demonstrated objective responses. We were unable to correlate the response to chemotherapy with information obtained by FDG-PET or FES-PET. Thirteen patients were treated with hormone therapy, and 8 (61%) responded to that therapy. Only 1 of the 5 patients whose tumors were ER+ but FES- received hormone therapy, and this treatment resulted in disease stabilization only. Multiple sites of disease were assessed by FES-PET in 17 patients with metastatic breast cancer. Functional hormone sensitivity, defined by FES-PET, was concordant with multiple lesions in 13 (76%). Ten patients with locally advanced breast cancer developed recurrent disease. The initial site of recurrence was the breast in 5 patients. Of the 5 patients with systemic recurrence, 4 had disease detected at the site of recurrence on the pretreatment FDG-PET study but not detected on pretreatment computed tomography. In our experience, FDG-PET imaging is more sensitive than conventional imaging methods, including computed tomography, in staging women with breast cancer. When compared with the in vitro assay of ER status, FES-PET has an apparent sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 100%. Our finding of a subset of patients who have tumors that are ER+ and FES- suggests that the functional assessment of hormone sensitivity by PET imaging can identify patients with ER+ disease whose tumors are likely to be hormone refractory.

PreviousNext
Back to top
June 1996
Volume 2, Issue 6
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)

Sign up for alerts

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Clinical Cancer Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose and 16alpha-[18F]fluoro-17beta-estradiol in breast cancer: correlation with estrogen receptor status and response to systemic therapy.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Clinical Cancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Clinical Cancer Research.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose and 16alpha-[18F]fluoro-17beta-estradiol in breast cancer: correlation with estrogen receptor status and response to systemic therapy.
J E Mortimer, F Dehdashti, B A Siegel, J A Katzenellenbogen, P Fracasso and M J Welch
Clin Cancer Res June 1 1996 (2) (6) 933-939;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose and 16alpha-[18F]fluoro-17beta-estradiol in breast cancer: correlation with estrogen receptor status and response to systemic therapy.
J E Mortimer, F Dehdashti, B A Siegel, J A Katzenellenbogen, P Fracasso and M J Welch
Clin Cancer Res June 1 1996 (2) (6) 933-939;
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  YouTube  RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • CCR Focus Archive
  • Meeting Abstracts

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Clinical Cancer Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Clinical Cancer Research
eISSN: 1557-3265
ISSN: 1078-0432

Advertisement