Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleCLINICAL INVESTIGATIONS

The Effects of Estrogen, Progesterone, and C-erbB-2 Receptor States on 18F-FDG Uptake of Primary Breast Cancer Lesions

Ayse Mavi, Tevfik F. Cermik, Muammer Urhan, Halis Puskulcu, Sandip Basu, Jian Q. Yu, Hongming Zhuang, Brian Czerniecki and Abass Alavi
Journal of Nuclear Medicine August 2007, 48 (8) 1266-1272; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.106.037440
Ayse Mavi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tevfik F. Cermik
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Muammer Urhan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Halis Puskulcu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sandip Basu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jian Q. Yu
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hongming Zhuang
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian Czerniecki
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Abass Alavi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIGURE 1. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1. 

    (A) Graphic presentation of SUVmax means in different combinations of ER and PR states shows no interaction between ER and PR states, indicating that effects of ER and PR states on 18F-FDG uptake were independent of each other. (B) Graphic presentation of SUVmax means in different combinations of ER and C-erbB-2R states shows that for lesions in which both these receptors are either positive or negative, SUVmax is higher than for lesions in which only one is positive. (C) Graphic presentation of SUVmax means in different combinations of C-erbB-2R and PR states shows that for lesions in which both these receptors are either positive or negative, SUVmax is higher than for lesions in which only one is positive.

  • FIGURE 2. 
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2. 

    18F-FDG PET images of 2 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients who underwent preoperative PET studies. (A) Image for which measured SUVmax of right breast lesion was 2.1 (arrow). After mastectomy, surgical pathology confirmed 1.2-cm invasive ductal cancer. Tissue receptor analysis revealed that this lesion was ER+, PR+, and C-erbB-2R−. (B) Image for which measured SUVmax of left breast lesion was 9.0 (arrow). After mastectomy, surgical pathology confirmed 2-cm invasive ductal cancer that was negative for ER, PR, and C-erbB-2R. ER+ lesion showed significantly lower SUVmax than did ER− lesion.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    SUVmax Means in Different States of PR and ER

    ER
    NegativePositive
    PRnSUVmaxSEnSUVmaxSE
    Negative335.540.8292.490.52
    Positive36.800.70733.100.28
    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    ANOVA Table of PR and ER Effects on SUVmax

    SourceSum of squaresdfMean squareFP
    ER93.408193.4089.1260.003
    PR7.14117.1410.6980.405
    ER × PR0.87510.8750.0850.771
    Error1,166.87611410.236
    Corrected total1,345.293117
    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    SUVmax Means in Different States of C-erbB-2R and ER

    ER
    NegativePositive
    C-erbB-2RnSUVmaxSEnSUVmaxSE
    Negative236.631.10732.770.23
    Positive133.900.6276.011.60
    • View popup
    TABLE 4

    ANOVA Table of ER and C-erbB-2R Effects on SUVmax

    SourceSum of squaresdfMean squareFP
    ER10.934110.9341.1750.281
    C-erbB-2R0.90010.9000.0970.756
    ER × C-erbB-2R129.2991129.29913.8950.000
    Error1,042.2151129.305
    Corrected total1,338.120115
    • View popup
    TABLE 5

    SUVmax Means in Different States of C-erbB-2R and PR

    PR
    NegativePositive
    C-erbB-2RnSUVmaxSEnSUVmaxSE
    Negative315.470.87652.850.25
    Positive113.230.5296.341.24
    • View popup
    TABLE 6

    ANOVA Table of PR and C-erbB-2R Effects on SUVmax

    SourceSum of squaresdfMean squareFP
    PR0.95910.9590.0950.759
    C-erbB-2R6.33416.3340.6270.430
    PR × C-erbB-2R131.3591131.35912.9990.000
    Error1,131.83411210.106
    Corrected total1,338.120115
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 48 (8)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 48, Issue 8
August 2007
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Effects of Estrogen, Progesterone, and C-erbB-2 Receptor States on 18F-FDG Uptake of Primary Breast Cancer Lesions
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
The Effects of Estrogen, Progesterone, and C-erbB-2 Receptor States on 18F-FDG Uptake of Primary Breast Cancer Lesions
Ayse Mavi, Tevfik F. Cermik, Muammer Urhan, Halis Puskulcu, Sandip Basu, Jian Q. Yu, Hongming Zhuang, Brian Czerniecki, Abass Alavi
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Aug 2007, 48 (8) 1266-1272; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.106.037440

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
The Effects of Estrogen, Progesterone, and C-erbB-2 Receptor States on 18F-FDG Uptake of Primary Breast Cancer Lesions
Ayse Mavi, Tevfik F. Cermik, Muammer Urhan, Halis Puskulcu, Sandip Basu, Jian Q. Yu, Hongming Zhuang, Brian Czerniecki, Abass Alavi
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Aug 2007, 48 (8) 1266-1272; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.106.037440
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • 18F-FDG PET/CT for Systemic Staging of Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer in Men
  • Evaluation of the Usefulness of FDG-PET/CT for Nodal Staging of Breast Cancer
  • Imaging Features of HER2 Overexpression in Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
  • Oestrogen-related tumour phenotype: positron emission tomography characterisation with 18F-FDG and 18F-FES
  • 18F-FDG Uptake in Lung, Breast, and Colon Cancers: Molecular Biology Correlates and Disease Characterization
  • 18F-FDG Small-Animal PET/CT Differentiates Trastuzumab-Responsive from Unresponsive Human Breast Cancer Xenografts in Athymic Mice
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Feasibility of Ultra-Low-Activity 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging Using a Long–Axial-Field-of-View PET/CT System
  • Cardiac Presynaptic Sympathetic Nervous Function Evaluated by Cardiac PET in Patients with Chronotropic Incompetence Without Heart Failure
  • Validation and Evaluation of a Vendor-Provided Head Motion Correction Algorithm on the uMI Panorama PET/CT System
Show more Clinical Investigations

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire