A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Investigation of 18F-FDG PET in the selection of patients with breast cancer as candidates for sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant therapy. | LitMetric

Purpose: The main objective of this study was to determine the role of [(18)F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) in the selection of patients with breast cancer as candidates for sentinel node biopsy (SNB) after neoadjuvant therapy.

Methods: Forty-four patients with primary breast cancer clinically classified as cT2, cT3 or cT4(a-c) cN0-N2 or cN3 M0 and with a baseline FDG PET scan positive both in the site of primary tumour and axillary lymph nodes underwent neoadjuvant therapy and then a second FDG PET scan. In the case of axillary FDG PET uptake, patients underwent axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). If the second FDG PET scan was negative for axillary involvement, SNB was performed in order to evaluate axillary lymph node status. Only in the case of SN positivity did total ALND follow.

Results: Specificity and positive predictive value of FDG PET for detection of axillary lymph node metastases after neoadjuvant therapy were as high as 83% (95% confidence interval: 51-97%) and 85% (95% confidence interval: 54-97%), respectively, whereas sensitivity, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy were inadequate for a correct staging (34, 32 and 48%, respectively).

Conclusion: The poor sensitivity of FDG PET in detecting axillary lymph node metastases makes SNB mandatory in cases of a negative scan. The relatively high positive predictive value seems to suggest a role of FDG PET in selecting patients who, after neoadjuvant therapy, are candidates for ALND, avoiding SNB. However, this issue requires confirmation in a larger series of patients.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-010-1494-1DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fdg pet
32
axillary lymph
20
neoadjuvant therapy
16
lymph node
16
breast cancer
12
pet scan
12
pet
9
pet selection
8
selection patients
8
patients breast
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!