These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Diffusion-weighted imaging and (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in breast cancer: Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficient and maximum standardized uptake values with prognostic factors.
    Author: Karan B, Pourbagher A, Torun N.
    Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging; 2016 Jun; 43(6):1434-44. PubMed ID: 26663655.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate the correlations between the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value and the standardized uptake value (SUV) with prognostic factors in breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy women with invasive breast cancer (56 cases of invasive ductal carcinoma, four of mixed ductal and lobular invasive carcinoma, three of lobular invasive carcinoma, two of micropapillary carcinoma, and one each of mixed ductal and mucinous carcinoma, mucinous carcinoma, medullary carcinoma, metaplastic carcinoma, and tubular carcinoma) were included in this study. All patients underwent presurgical breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) at 1.5T and whole-body (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18) F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) / computed tomography (CT). For all invasive breast cancers and invasive ductal carcinomas, we assessed the relationships among ADC, SUV, and pathological prognostic factors. RESULTS: Both the median ADC value and maximum SUV (SUVmax) were significantly associated with vascular invasion (P = 0.008 and P = 0.026, respectively). SUVmax was also significantly correlated with tumor size (P = 0.001), histological grade (P = 0.001), lymph node status (P = 0.0015), estrogen receptor status (P = 0.010), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status (P = 0.020), whereas ADC values were not. The correlation between the ADC and SUVmax was not significant (P = 0.356; R = -0.112). Mucinous carcinoma showed high ADC and relatively low SUVmax. Medullary carcinoma showed low ADC and high SUVmax. When we evaluated the relationships among ADC, SUVmax, and prognostic factors in the 56 invasive ductal carcinomas, our statistical results were not significantly changed, except SUVmax was also significantly associated with progesterone receptor status (P = 0.034), but not lymph node status. CONCLUSION: SUVmax may be valuable for predicting the prognosis of breast cancer. Both ADC and SUVmax are useful to predict vascular invasion. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2016;43:1434-1444.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]