Breast cancer imaging using radiolabelled somatostatin analogues

Simone Dalm, Marleen Melis, Jasper Emmering, Dik Kwekkeboom, Marion Jong

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Imaging and therapy using radiolabelled somatostatin analogues are methods successfully used in patients with somatostatin receptor (SSTR)-expressing neuroendocrine tumours. Since these techniques were first introduced, many improvements have been made. SSTR expression has also been reported on breast cancer (BC). Currently mammography, magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound are the most frequent methods used for BC imaging. Since SSTR expression on BC was demonstrated, clinical studies examining the feasibility of visualizing primary BC using SSTR radioligands have been performed. However, to date SSTR-mediated nuclear imaging is not used clinically in BC patients. The aim of this review is to assess whether recent improvements made within nuclear medicine may enable SSTR-mediated imaging to play a role in BC management. For this we critically analysed results of past studies and discussed the potential of the improvements made within nuclear medicine on SSTR-mediated nuclear imaging of BC. Seven databases were searched for publications on BC imaging with SSTR radioligands. The papers found were analysed by 3 individual observers to identify whether the studies met the pre-set inclusion criteria defined as studies in which nuclear imaging using radiolabelled SST analogues was performed in patients with breast lesions. Twenty-four papers were selected for this review including studies on SSTR-mediated nuclear imaging in BC, neuroendocrine BC and other breast lesions. The analysed studies were heterogeneous with respect to the imaging method, imaging protocol, patient groups and the radiolabelled SST analogues used. Despite the fact that the analysed studies were heterogeneous, sensitivity for primary BC ranged from 36-100%. In a subset of the studies LN lesions were visualized, but sensitivity was lower compared to that for primary tumours. A part of the studies included benign lesions and specificity ranged from 22-100%. Furthermore, false negatives and false positives were reported. In the majority of the studies scan outcome was not associated with BC subtype. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)559-565
Number of pages7
JournalNuclear Medicine and Biology
Volume43
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Cite this