Androgen receptor and estrogen receptor imaging in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

Authors

null

Clasina Marieke Venema

University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands

Clasina Marieke Venema , Lemonitsa H. Mammatas , Michel van Kruchten , Giulia Apollonio , Carolina Pia Schroder , Andor W. J. M. Glaudemans , Otto S. Hoekstra , Henk M.W. Verheul , Bert van der Vegt , Erik F. J. De Vries , Elisabeth De Vries , Catharina Wilhelmina Menke , Geke Hospers

Organizations

University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands, Department of Medical Oncology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands

Research Funding

Other

Background: The ER, PR and HER2 expression is routinely determined in breast cancer patients for prognosis and treatment decision-making. The androgen receptor (AR) is also present in the majority of breast cancer patients, offering a potential new drug target.ER expression in tumor lesions can be visualized by 18F-fluoroestradiol (FES) PET throughout the body. The AR-expression could be visualized by 18F-fluorodihydrotestosterone (FDHT) PET in prostate cancer patients.The aim was to obtain accurate non-invasive information about ER and AR tumor receptor status with FES and FDHT PET in breast cancer patients. Methods: Metastatic breast cancer patients with an ER positive primary tumor and ≥ 1 metastasis were eligible. Patients were staged with a bone scan and chest and abdominal CT scan. Lesions visible on conventional imaging were evaluable for primary endpoint, i.e. the concordance of FES and FDHT uptake with respectively ER and AR expression determined immunohistochemically (IHC) in a metastasis. Patients underwent a FES PET and FDHT PET scan within 2 weeks. ER and AR staining was performed centrally according to ASCO guidelines. IHC > 10% and > 1% nuclear staining was considered AR and ER positive, respectively. Correlations between PET and IHC were calculated using Spearman’s correlation coefficient. Results: 13/24 patients were evaluable for the primary endpoint. 5 patients had non-representative biopsies, biopsied liver lesions (n = 3) were not evaluable on PET due to high physiological background uptake in healthy tissue. 2 skin lesions and 1 intestinal lesion were not visible on conventional imaging. The correlation between AR expression and FDHT uptake (SUVmax ) was ρ: 0.67 (p = 0.01) and between ER expression and FES uptake was ρ: 0.75(p = 0.003). Conclusions: It is feasible to visualize AR expressing lesions with FDHT PET in metastatic breast cancer patients, and FDHT uptake correlates with AR expression in representative biopsies. FES uptake shows a similar correlation with ER expression. Supported by CTMM-Mammoth project. Clinical trial information: NCT01988324

Mean uptake (SUVmax) of biopsied lesions per subgroup.

PET/IHCAR > 10%
n = 11
AR < 10%
n = 2
ER > 1%
n = 11
ER < 1%
n = 2
FDHT (SD)3.05 (0.90)1.89 (0.01)
FES (SD)4.30 (2.42)1.13 (0.42)

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2016 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Tumor Biology

Track

Tumor Biology

Sub Track

Molecular Diagnostics and Imaging

Clinical Trial Registration Number

NCT01988324

Citation

J Clin Oncol 34, 2016 (suppl; abstr 11553)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.11553

Abstract #

11553

Poster Bd #

250

Abstract Disclosures