{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,19]],"date-time":"2026-06-19T16:07:32Z","timestamp":1781885252518,"version":"3.54.5"},"reference-count":21,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,9]],"date-time":"2024-10-09T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1728432000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,9]],"date-time":"2024-10-09T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1728432000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Insights Imaging"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>To investigate in a feasibility study the combination of [<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG whole-body (WB) positron emission tomography-magnetic resonance (PET-MR), including an integrated breast MR within a single protocol for locoregional and distant staging in breast cancer patients.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>Consecutive patients with breast cancer diagnoses according to conventional imaging modalities (full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and ultrasound (US)) were prospectively included. All patients underwent [<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG WB PET-MR, including an integrated dedicated breast MR (prone position) and WB PET-MR (supine position) protocol. Results of [<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG WB PET-MR, including integrated breast MR, versus conventional imaging modalities were compared.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>From April 2021\u2013April 2022, 28 patients were included. On conventional imaging, cT1-2 breast cancer was present in 22 (FFDM) and 23 (US) out of 28 patients. With regard to clinical nodal status, eight patients were considered cN0, eighteen cN1 (1-3 suspicious lymph nodes), and two patients were cN2 (four suspicious axillary lymph nodes\/internal mammary lymph node metastasis). [<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG WB PET-MR, including an integrated breast MR protocol, upstaged clinical tumor status in two patients and clinical nodal status in nine patients according to both [<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG WB PET-MR and breast MR findings. In addition, distant metastases were detected in three patients (liver\/bone), and another patient was diagnosed with a synchronous primary tumor (lung cancer).<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>[<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG WB PET-MR, including an integrated breast MR within a single protocol in breast cancer patients, is feasible and provides a promising new approach in breast cancer patients with regard to locoregional and distant staging.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Critical relevance statement<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p>[<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG whole-body PET-MR, including an integrated breast MR protocol, is feasible and allows locoregional and distant staging within a single imaging exam in breast cancer patients.<\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Key Points<\/jats:title>\n                <jats:p><jats:list list-type=\"bullet\">\n                  <jats:list-item>\n                    <jats:p>[<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG PET-MR allows the combination of breast MR and whole-body staging.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:list-item>\n                  <jats:list-item>\n                    <jats:p>Therefore, a single protocol of whole-body [<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG PET-MR, including an integrated breast MRI, is investigated.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:list-item>\n                  <jats:list-item>\n                    <jats:p>[<jats:sup>18<\/jats:sup>F]FDG PET-MR, including an integrated breast MR is feasible and can be considered in daily clinical practice.<\/jats:p>\n                  <\/jats:list-item>\n                <\/jats:list><\/jats:p>\n              <\/jats:sec><jats:sec>\n                <jats:title>Graphical Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                \n              <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1186\/s13244-024-01830-5","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,9]],"date-time":"2024-10-09T13:02:21Z","timestamp":1728478941000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":5,"title":["[18F]FDG whole-body PET-MR including an integrated breast MR protocol for locoregional and distant staging in breast cancer patients\u2014a feasibility study"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"15","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-6431-3538","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Thiemo J. A.","family":"van Nijnatten","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Cornelis M.","family":"de Mooij","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Cristina","family":"Mitea","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Janneke","family":"Houwers","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Maaike","family":"de Boer","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Marjolein L.","family":"Smidt","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Felix M.","family":"Mottaghy","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Joachim E.","family":"Wildberger","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,9]]},"reference":[{"key":"1830_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I et al (2021) Cancer statistics for the year 2020: an overview. Int J Cancer. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ijc.33588","DOI":"10.1002\/ijc.33588"},{"key":"1830_CR2","unstructured":"Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M et al (2014) SEER cancer statistics review, 1975\u20132012. National Cancer Institute"},{"key":"1830_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"11","DOI":"10.1007\/s13244-016-0531-4","volume":"8","author":"F Sardanelli","year":"2017","unstructured":"Sardanelli F, Fallenberg EM, Clauser P et al (2017) Mammography: an update of the EUSOBI recommendations on information for women. Insights Imaging 8:11\u201318","journal-title":"Insights Imaging"},{"key":"1830_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1909","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-017-5121-4","volume":"28","author":"P Clauser","year":"2018","unstructured":"Clauser P, Mann R, Athanasiou A et al (2018) A survey by the European Society of Breast Imaging on the utilisation of breast MRI in clinical practice. Eur Radiol 28:1909\u20131918","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"},{"key":"1830_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1475","DOI":"10.1016\/j.annonc.2021.09.019","volume":"32","author":"A Gennari","year":"2021","unstructured":"Gennari A, Andre F, Barrios CH et al (2021) ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for the diagnosis, staging and treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 32:1475\u20131495","journal-title":"Ann Oncol"},{"key":"1830_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1240","DOI":"10.6004\/jnccn.2020.7592","volume":"18","author":"H Ko","year":"2020","unstructured":"Ko H, Baghdadi Y, Love C, Sparano JA (2020) Clinical utility of 18F-FDG PET\/CT in staging localized breast cancer before initiating preoperative systemic therapy. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 18:1240\u20131246","journal-title":"J Natl Compr Canc Netw"},{"key":"1830_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Ulaner GA, Castillo R, Wills J, Gonen M, Goldman DA (2017) 18)F-FDG-PET\/CT for systemic staging of patients with newly diagnosed ER-positive and HER2-positive breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44:1420\u20131427","DOI":"10.1007\/s00259-017-3709-1"},{"key":"1830_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"995","DOI":"10.1097\/MNM.0000000000001254","volume":"41","author":"CM de Mooij","year":"2020","unstructured":"de Mooij CM, Sunen I, Mitea C et al (2020) Diagnostic performance of PET\/computed tomography versus PET\/MRI and diffusion-weighted imaging in the N- and M-staging of breast cancer patients. Nucl Med Commun 41:995\u20131004","journal-title":"Nucl Med Commun"},{"key":"1830_CR9","unstructured":"NABON. National breast cancer guideline (2012) https:\/\/www.nabon.nl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/Dutch-Breast-Cancer-Guideline-2012.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2024"},{"key":"1830_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"W641","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.10.4889","volume":"196","author":"PA Baltzer","year":"2011","unstructured":"Baltzer PA, Dietzel M, Burmeister HP et al (2011) Application of MR mammography beyond local staging: is there a potential to accurately assess axillary lymph nodes? evaluation of an extended protocol in an initial prospective study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196:W641\u2013W647","journal-title":"Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"1830_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"756","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.112.112177","volume":"54","author":"RD Niederkohr","year":"2013","unstructured":"Niederkohr RD, Greenspan BS, Prior JO et al (2013) Reporting guidance for oncologic 18F-FDG PET\/CT imaging. J Nucl Med 54:756\u2013761","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"1830_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"68","DOI":"10.1055\/a-0830-4453","volume":"58","author":"L Umutlu","year":"2019","unstructured":"Umutlu L, Beyer T, Grueneisen JS et al (2019) Whole-body [18F]-FDG-PET\/MRI for oncology: a consensus recommendation. Nuklearmedizin 58:68\u201376","journal-title":"Nuklearmedizin"},{"key":"1830_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1194","DOI":"10.1093\/annonc\/mdz173","volume":"30","author":"F Cardoso","year":"2019","unstructured":"Cardoso F, Kyriakides S, Ohno S et al (2019) Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 30:1194\u20131220","journal-title":". Ann Oncol"},{"key":"1830_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1796","DOI":"10.1007\/s00259-017-3745-x","volume":"44","author":"B Goorts","year":"2017","unstructured":"Goorts B, Voo S, van Nijnatten TJA et al (2017) Hybrid (18)F-FDG PET\/MRI might improve locoregional staging of breast cancer patients prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44:1796\u20131805","journal-title":"Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging"},{"key":"1830_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"992","DOI":"10.1007\/s00259-021-05502-0","volume":"49","author":"J Morawitz","year":"2022","unstructured":"Morawitz J, Bruckmann NM, Dietzel F et al (2022) Comparison of nodal staging between CT, MRI, and [(18)F]-FDG PET\/MRI in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49:992\u20131001","journal-title":"Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging"},{"key":"1830_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1103","DOI":"10.1007\/s00259-014-2689-7","volume":"41","author":"D Bellevre","year":"2014","unstructured":"Bellevre D, Blanc Fournier C, Switsers O et al (2014) Staging the axilla in breast cancer patients with (1)(8)F-FDG PET: how small are the metastases that we can detect with new generation clinical PET systems? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41:1103\u20131112","journal-title":"Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging"},{"key":"1830_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-019-54017-0","volume":"9","author":"S Samiei","year":"2019","unstructured":"Samiei S, van Nijnatten TJA, van Beek HC et al (2019) Diagnostic performance of axillary ultrasound and standard breast MRI for differentiation between limited and advanced axillary nodal disease in clinically node-positive breast cancer patients. Sci Rep 9:17476","journal-title":"Sci Rep"},{"key":"1830_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1976","DOI":"10.1007\/s00259-020-05113-1","volume":"48","author":"P Biondetti","year":"2021","unstructured":"Biondetti P, Vangel MG, Lahoud RM et al (2021) PET\/MRI assessment of lung nodules in primary abdominal malignancies: sensitivity and outcome analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48:1976\u20131986","journal-title":"Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging"},{"key":"1830_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.115.162966","volume":"57","author":"LM Sawicki","year":"2016","unstructured":"Sawicki LM, Grueneisen J, Buchbender C et al (2016) Evaluation of the outcome of lung nodules missed on 18F-FDG PET\/MRI compared with 18F-FDG PET\/CT in patients with known malignancies. J Nucl Med 57:15\u201320","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"1830_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"252","DOI":"10.2967\/jnumed.116.178749","volume":"58","author":"V Lebon","year":"2017","unstructured":"Lebon V, Alberini JL, Pierga JY, Dieras V, Jehanno N, Wartski M (2017) Rate of distant metastases on 18F-FDG PET\/CT at initial staging of breast cancer: comparison of women younger and older than 40 years. J Nucl Med 58:252\u2013257","journal-title":"J Nucl Med"},{"key":"1830_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s13550-023-00953-y","volume":"13","author":"CM de Mooij","year":"2023","unstructured":"de Mooij CM, Ploumen RAW, Nelemans PJ, Mottaghy FM, Smidt ML, van Nijnatten TJA (2023) The influence of receptor expression and clinical subtypes on baseline [18F]FDG uptake in breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. EJNMMI Res 13:5","journal-title":"EJNMMI Res"}],"container-title":["Insights into Imaging"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s13244-024-01830-5.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s13244-024-01830-5\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s13244-024-01830-5.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,9]],"date-time":"2024-10-09T13:02:26Z","timestamp":1728478946000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/insightsimaging.springeropen.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s13244-024-01830-5"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,9]]},"references-count":21,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,12]]}},"alternative-id":["1830"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s13244-024-01830-5","relation":{},"ISSN":["1869-4101"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1869-4101","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,9]]},"assertion":[{"value":"29 April 2024","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"20 September 2024","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"9 October 2024","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"The authors of this manuscript declare relationships with the following companies: T.J.A.v.N. reports funding by speakers bureau by Bayer and GE Healthcare, outside of the submitted work. J.E.W. reports institutional grants by Bard, Bayer, Boston, Brianlab, GE, Philips, and Siemens outside of the submitted work. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"243"}}