TY - JOUR
T1 - Response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer
T2 - a comparison of survival times between FDG-PET/CT and CE-CT
AU - Naghavi-Behzad, Mohammad
AU - Vogsen, Marianne
AU - Vester, Rasmus Mølgård
AU - Olsen, Maiken Madsen Bjerregaard
AU - Oltmann, Hjalte
AU - Braad, Poul Erik
AU - Asmussen, Jon Thor
AU - Gerke, Oke
AU - Vach, Werner
AU - Kidholm, Kristian
AU - Kodahl, Annette Raskov
AU - Weber, Wolfgang
AU - Hildebrandt, Malene Grubbe
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.
PY - 2022/5/18
Y1 - 2022/5/18
N2 - Background: We compared overall survival for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients monitored with CE-CT, FDG-PET/CT or a combination of them in an observational setting. Methods: Patients with biopsy-verified (recurrent or de novo) MBC (n = 300) who were treated at Odense university hospital (Denmark) and response monitored with FDG-PET/CT (n = 83), CE-CT (n = 144), or a combination of these (n = 73) were followed until 2019. Survival was compared between the scan groups, and were adjusted for clinico-histopathological variables representing potential confounders in a Cox proportional-hazard regression model. Results: The study groups were mostly comparable regarding baseline characteristics, but liver metastases were reported more frequently in CE-CT group (38.9%) than in FDG-PET/CT group (19.3%) and combined group (24.7%). Median survival was 30.0 months for CE-CT group, 44.3 months for FDG-PET/CT group and 54.0 months for Combined group. Five-year survival rates were significantly higher for FDG-PET/CT group (41.9%) and combined group (43.3%), than for CE-CT group (15.8%). Using the CE-CT group as reference, the hazard ratio was 0.44 (95% CI: 0.29–0.68, P = 0.001) for the FDG-PET/CT group after adjusting for baseline characteristics. FDG-PET/CT detected the first progression 4.7 months earlier than CE-CT, leading to earlier treatment change. Conclusions: In this single-center, observational study, patients with metastatic breast cancer who were response monitored with FDG-PET/CT alone or in combination with CE-CT had longer overall survival than patients monitored with CE-CT alone. Confirmation of these findings by further, preferably randomised clinical trials is warranted.
AB - Background: We compared overall survival for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients monitored with CE-CT, FDG-PET/CT or a combination of them in an observational setting. Methods: Patients with biopsy-verified (recurrent or de novo) MBC (n = 300) who were treated at Odense university hospital (Denmark) and response monitored with FDG-PET/CT (n = 83), CE-CT (n = 144), or a combination of these (n = 73) were followed until 2019. Survival was compared between the scan groups, and were adjusted for clinico-histopathological variables representing potential confounders in a Cox proportional-hazard regression model. Results: The study groups were mostly comparable regarding baseline characteristics, but liver metastases were reported more frequently in CE-CT group (38.9%) than in FDG-PET/CT group (19.3%) and combined group (24.7%). Median survival was 30.0 months for CE-CT group, 44.3 months for FDG-PET/CT group and 54.0 months for Combined group. Five-year survival rates were significantly higher for FDG-PET/CT group (41.9%) and combined group (43.3%), than for CE-CT group (15.8%). Using the CE-CT group as reference, the hazard ratio was 0.44 (95% CI: 0.29–0.68, P = 0.001) for the FDG-PET/CT group after adjusting for baseline characteristics. FDG-PET/CT detected the first progression 4.7 months earlier than CE-CT, leading to earlier treatment change. Conclusions: In this single-center, observational study, patients with metastatic breast cancer who were response monitored with FDG-PET/CT alone or in combination with CE-CT had longer overall survival than patients monitored with CE-CT alone. Confirmation of these findings by further, preferably randomised clinical trials is warranted.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122709486&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41416-021-01654-w
DO - 10.1038/s41416-021-01654-w
M3 - Article
C2 - 35013575
AN - SCOPUS:85122709486
SN - 0007-0920
VL - 126
SP - 1271
EP - 1279
JO - British Journal of Cancer
JF - British Journal of Cancer
IS - 9
ER -
