English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In addition to the well-known estrogen receptor (ER) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, the androgen receptor (AR) is also a potential drug target in breast cancer treatment. Whole-body imaging can provide information across lesions within a patient. ER expression in tumor lesions can be visualized by 18 F-fluoroestradiol ( 18 F-FES) PET, and AR expression has been visualized in prostate cancer patients with 18 F-fluorodihydrotestosterone ( 18 F-FDHT) PET. Our aim was to assess the concordance between 18 F-FDHT and 18 F-FES PET and tumor AR and ER expression measured immunohistochemically in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Methods: Patients with ER-positive metastatic breast cancer were eligible for the study, irrespective of tumor AR status. The concordance of 18 F-FDHT and 18 F-FES uptake on PET with immunohistochemical expression of AR and ER in biopsies of corresponding metastases was analyzed. Patients underwent 18 F-FDHT PET and 18 F-FES PET. A metastasis was biopsied within 8 wk of the PET procedures. Tumor samples with more than 10% and 1% nuclear tumor cell staining were considered, respectively, AR- and ER-positive. Correlations between PET uptake and semiquantitative immunohistochemical scoring (percentage positive cells × intensity) were calculated. The optimum threshold of SUV to discriminate positive and negative lesions for both AR and ER was determined by receiver-operating-characteristic analysis. Results: In the 13 evaluable patients, correlation ( R   2  ) between semiquantitative AR expression and 18 F-FDHT uptake was 0.47 ( P = 0.01) and between semiquantitative ER expression and 18 F-FES uptake 0.78 ( P = 0.01). The optimal cutoff for AR-positive lesions was an SUV max of 1.94 for 18 F-FDHT PET, yielding a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 100%; the optimal cutoff was an SUV max of 1.54 for 18 F-FES PET, resulting in a sensitivity and specificity of 100% for ER. Conclusion:  18 F-FDHT and 18 F-FES uptake correlate well with AR and ER expression levels in representative biopsies. These results show the potential use of whole-body imaging for receptor status assessment, particularly in view of biopsy-associated sampling errors and heterogeneous receptor expression in breast cancer metastases.

Androgen and Estrogen Receptor Imaging in Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients as a Surrogate for Tissue Biopsies