Skip to main content
. 2016 Apr 11;50(3):246–254. doi: 10.1007/s13139-016-0412-2

Table 2.

Comparisons of PET parameters according to the biomarker status

Number of patients SUVmax SUVmean PET parameters*
RImax (%) RImean (%) MTV (mL)
All patients 55 7.9 (5.7–11.5) 3.4 (2.8–4.7) 16.0 (8.3–24.1) 11.7 (7.0–18.0) 20.1 (9.2–44.0)
ER
 Positive 30 7.2 (3.5–11.1) 3.1 (2.5–4.5) 15.5 (8.0–25.4) 9.9 (5.5–15.3) 17.4 (6.3–36.3)
 Negative 25 9.0 (6.5–12.3) 3.6 (3.1–4.8) 16.2 (8.7–21.7) 16.2 (10.8–21.0) 33.8 (16.3–51.8)
p value 0.090 0.099 0.839 0.012 0.031
PR
 Positive 43 7.9 (5.3–12.8) 3.4 (2.6–5.2) 15.5 (4.8–25.3) 11.3 (5.9–18.0) 20.2 (10.9–47.7)
 Negative 12 8.2 (6.4–9.4) 3.7 (3.2–4.4) 16.4 (14.5–20.8) 14.5 (10.6–17.5) 19.0 (8.8–35.9)
p value 0.744 0.863 0.313 0.343 0.501
HER-2
 Positive 21 9.5 (6.4–11.9) 4.1 (3.1–4.7) 16.3 (11.1–20.8) 16.1 (10.7–21.6) 24.9 (8.8–47.9)
 Negative 34 7.2 (5.1–11.1) 3.3 (2.6–4.7) 15.5 (4.3–25.0) 10.5 (5.5–16.1) 19.0 (10.6–40.9)
p value 0.279 0.396 0.456 0.031 0.795

*PET parameters are presented as median values (interquartile range)