Head-to-Head Comparison between <sup>18</sup>F-FES PET/CT and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT in Oestrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Details

Ressource 1Download: 35407526_BIB_17B549749C91.pdf (1276.68 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: Final published version
License: CC BY 4.0
Serval ID
serval:BIB_17B549749C91
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Publication sub-type
Review (review): journal as complete as possible of one specific subject, written based on exhaustive analyses from published work.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Head-to-Head Comparison between <sup>18</sup>F-FES PET/CT and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT in Oestrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
Author(s)
Piccardo A., Fiz F., Treglia G., Bottoni G., Trimboli P.
ISSN
2077-0383 (Print)
ISSN-L
2077-0383
Publication state
Published
Issued date
30/03/2022
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
11
Number
7
Pages
1919
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Review
Publication Status: epublish
Abstract
<sup>18</sup> F-FDG PET/CT is a powerful diagnostic tool in breast cancer (BC). However, it might have a reduced sensitivity in differentiated, oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) BC. In this setting, specific molecular imaging with fluorine-oestradiol ( <sup>18</sup> F-FES) PET/CT could help in overcoming these limitations; however, the literature on the diagnostic accuracy of this method is limited. We therefore planned this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare <sup>18</sup> F-FDG and <sup>18</sup> F-FES PET/CT in ER+ BC patients. We performed a literature search to identify all studies performing a head-to-head comparison between the two methods; we excluded review articles, preclinical studies, case reports and small case series. Finally, seven studies were identified (overall: 171 patients; range: 7-49 patients). A patients-based analysis (PBA) showed that <sup>18</sup> F-FDG and <sup>18</sup> F-FES PET/CT had a similar high pooled sensitivity (97% and 94%, respectively) at the lesion-based analysis (LBA), <sup>18</sup> F-FES performed slightly better than <sup>18</sup> F-FDG (pooled sensitivity: 95% vs. 85%, respectively). Moreover, when we considered only the studies dealing with the restaging setting (n = 3), this difference in sensitivity was even more marked (98% vs. 81%, respectively). In conclusion, both tracers feature an excellent sensitivity in ER+ BC; however, <sup>18</sup> F-FES PET/CT could be preferred in the restaging setting.
Keywords
FDG, FES, PET/CT, breast cancer, diagnosis, nuclear medicine, oestrogen receptor
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
19/04/2022 13:27
Last modification date
23/01/2024 7:21
Usage data