To correlate breast density quantified from digital mammograms with mean and maximum
standardized uptake values (SUVs) from positron emission tomography (PET). This was
a prospective study that included 56 women with a history of suspicion of breast cancer
(mean age 49.2±9.3 years), who underwent 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG)-PET imaging of their breasts as well as digital mammography.
A computer thresholding algorithm was applied to the contralateral nonmalignant breasts
to quantitatively estimate the breast density on digital mammograms. The breasts were
also classified into one of four Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories
for density. Comparisons between SUV and breast density were made using linear regression
and the Student's t test. Linear regression of mean SUV vs. average breast density showed a positive
relationship with a Pearson's correlation coefficient of R2=0.83. The quantified breast densities and mean SUVs were significantly greater for
mammographically dense than nondense breasts (P<.0001 for both). The average quantified densities and mean SUVs of the breasts were
significantly greater for premenopausal than for postmenopausal patients (P<.05). Eight (16%) of 51 patients had maximum SUVs that equaled 1.6 or greater. There
is a positive linear correlation between quantified breast density on digital mammography
and FDG uptake on PET. Menopausal status affects the metabolic activity of normal
breast tissue, resulting in higher SUVs in pre- vs. postmenopausal patients.
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Clinical ImagingAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2009 Published by Elsevier Inc.