Table 2.
Percentage of upstaging after 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT compared to conventional modalities for each initial TNM stage according to the 7th and 8th editions of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual (adapted from [34])
| Percentage of upstaging after 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage | TNM (based on conventional imaging) | Groheux et al. [37] Prospective, n = 254, 86% NST | Cochet et al. [38] Prospective, n = 142, 90% NST | Riedl et al. [14] Retrospective, n = 134, 92% NST | Ulaner et al. [42] Retrospective, n = 232 TNBC, 94% NST | Ulaner et al. [43] Retrospective, n = 238, 86% NST | Lebon et al. [44] Retrospective, n = 107, 85% NST | Ko et al. [39] Retrospective, n = 195, 88% NST | Overall metastasis range (mean) | Distant metastasis range (mean) | |
| I | T1N0M0 | NA | NA | 5 | 0 | NA | [8] | NA |
0–8 (4) |
NA | |
| IIA | T0N1M0 T1N1M0 T2N0M0 |
4.5 [2.3] |
36 [9] |
5 | 5 | 4 | [11] |
24 [0] |
4–36 (13) |
2–9 (6) |
|
| IIB | T2N1M0 T3N0M0 |
16.1 [10.7] |
18 [7] |
17 | 15 | 14 | [15] |
39 [13] |
14–39 (19) |
7–13 (10) |
|
| IIIA | T1N2M0 T2N2M0 T3N1M0 T3N2M0 |
31.7 [17.5] |
33 [0] |
31 | 17 | 24 | [44] |
54 [22] |
17–54 (34) |
18–22 (20) |
|
| IIIB | T4N0M0 T4N1M0 T4N2M0 |
51.4 [36.5] |
32 [21] |
50 | 57 |
27 [17] |
24–57 (41) |
17–37 (25) |
|||
| IIIC | AnyT N3M0 |
47.1 [47.1] |
13 [13] |
50 | 33 |
37 [37] |
13–50 (35) |
13–47 (32) |
|||
In these studies, the predominant histological type was NST BC (ranging from 84 to 95%)
Conventional modalities generally included physical examination, mammography, and/or US of the breast. Bone scan was also done in two studies [37, 38]. In one study, US of the liver, chest X-ray, or other imaging techniques were performed based on the clinical situation [38]
The values correspond to the overall upstaging rate (%), including both regional nodal metastasis and distant metastasis. The values inside square brackets correspond to distant upstaging rate only (%) (excluding regional lymph nodes)
NA data not available