"skipMainNavigation"
Search
Quick Search in Journals
Quick Search anywhere
Advanced Search
Radiology
Menu
Previous
Next
Original Research

Breast-specific Gamma Imaging as an Adjunct Imaging Modality for the Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

Published Online:Jun 1 2008https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2473061678

Abstract

Purpose: To retrospectively determine the sensitivity and specificity of breast-specific gamma imaging (BSGI) for the detection of breast cancer by using pathologic results as the reference standard.

Materials and Methods: This study was Institutional Review Board approved and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant. Informed consent was obtained for participants who were not imaged as part of their clinical protocol but were participating in other Institutional Review Board–approved studies that used BSGI. A retrospective review of 146 women (aged 32–98 years) undergoing BSGI and breast biopsy was performed. Patients underwent BSGI with intravenous injection of 30 mCi (1110 MBq) of technetium 99 (99mTc)-sestamibi and were imaged in craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique projections. Study images were assigned scores, and scores were classified as positive (focal increased radiotracer uptake) or negative (no uptake or scattered heterogeneous physiologic uptake) and compared with biopsy results. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were determined.

Results: In 146 patients, 167 lesions underwent biopsy, of which 83 (16 ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS] and 67 invasive cancers) were malignant. Of 84 nonmalignant lesions, 82 were benign and two showed atypical histologic results (one atypical lobular hyperplasia and one lobular carcinoma in situ). BSGI helped detect cancer in 80 of 83 malignant lesions with a sensitivity of 96.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92%, 99%) and correctly identified 50 of 84 nonmalignant lesions as negative for cancer with a specificity of 59.5% (95% CI: 49%, 70%). The positive predictive value for 80 of 114 malignant lesions with a BSGI examination with findings positive for cancer was 68.8% (95% CI: 60%, 78%) and the negative predictive value for 50 of 53 nonmalignant lesions was 94.3% (95% CI: 88%, 99%). The smallest invasive cancer and DCIS detected were both 1 mm. BSGI helped detect occult cancer not visualized at mammography or ultrasonography in six patients.

Conclusion: BSIG has high sensitivity (96.4%) and moderate specificity (59.5%) helping detect breast cancers.

© RSNA, 2008

References

  • 1 Rosenberg RD, Hung WC, Williamson MR, et al. Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Radiology 1998; 209: 511–518.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165–175.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Aktolun C, Bayhan H, Kir M. Clinical experience with Tc-99m MIBI imaging in patients with malignant tumors: preliminary results and comparison with T1-201. Clin Nucl Med 1992;17:171–176.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 4 Khalkhali I, Mena I, Jouanne E, et al. Prone scintimammography in patients with suspicion of carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg 1994;178:491–497.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 5 Taillefer R. Clinical applications of 99mTc-sestamibi scintimammography. Semin Nucl Med 2005;35:100–115.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 6 Lumachi F, Ferretti G, Povolato M, et al. Accuracy of technetium-99m sestamibi scintimammography and x-ray mammography in premenopausal women with suspected breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:1776–1780.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 7 Khalkhali I, Baum JK, Villanueva-Meyer J, et al. 99mTc-sestamibi breast imaging for the examination of patients with dense and fatty breasts: multicenter study. Radiology 2002;222:149–155.
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Cutrone JA, Khalkhali I, Yosper LS, et al. Tc-99m sestamibi scintimammography for the evaluation of breast masses in patients with radiographically dense breasts. Breast J 1999;5:383–388.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 9 Babuccu O, Peksoy I, Kargi E, et al. The value of scintimammography in reduction mammoplasties: a preliminary study. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2003;27:296–300.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 10 Arslan N, Ozturk E, Ilgan S, et al. Tc-99m MIBI scintimammography in the evaluation of breast lesions and axillary involvement: a comparison with mammography and histopathological diagnosis. Nucl Med Commun 1999;20:317–325.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 11 Maffioli L, Agresti R, Chiti A, et al. Prone scintimammography in patients with non-palpable breast lesions. Anticancer Res 1996;16:1269–1274.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 12 Scopinaro F, Schillaci O, Ussof W, et al. A three center study on the diagnostic accuracy of 99m Tc MIBI scintimammography. Anticancer Res 1997;17:1631–1634.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 13 Scopinaro F, Ierardi M, Porfiri LM, et al. 99m Tc MIBI prone scintimammography in patients with high and intermediate risk mammography. Anticancer Res 1997;17:1635–1638.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 14 Tolmos J, Cutrone JA, Wang B, et al. Scintimammographic analysis of nonpalpable breast lesions previously identified by conventional mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:846–849.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 15 Palmedo H, Grunwald F, Bender H, et al. Scintimammography with technetium-99m methoxyisobutylionitrile: comparison with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:940–946.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 16 Brem RF, Schoonjans JM, Kieper DA, Majewski S, Goodman S, Civelek C. High-resolution scintimammography: a pilot study. J Nucl Med 2002;43:909–915.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 17 Brem RF, Rapelyea JA, Zisman G, et al. Occult breast cancer: scintimammography with high resolution breast specific gamma camera in women at high risk for breast cancer. Radiology 2005;237:274–280.
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Coover LR, Caravaglia G, Kuhn P. Scintimammography with dedicated breast camera detects and localizes occult carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2004;45:553–558.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 19 Rhodes DJ, O'Connor MK, Phillips SW, Smith RL, Collins DA. Molecular breast imaging: a new technique using technetium Tc 99m scintimammography to detect small tumors of the breast. Mayo Clin Proc 2005;80:24–30.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 20 Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst 1989;81:1879–1886.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 21 Hanley JA, Negassa A, Edwardes MD, Forrester JE. Statistical analysis of correlated data using generalized estimating equations: an orientation. Am J Epidemiol 2003;157:364–375.
    Medline Google Scholar
  • 22 SAS Institute. SAS/STAT 9.1 user's guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 2004; 1611–1730.
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Bluemke DA, Gatsonis CA, Chen MH, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy. JAMA 2004;292(22):2735–2742.
    Medline Google Scholar

Article History

Published in print: 2008