RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Impact of 18F-FDG PET/MRI on Therapeutic Management of Women with Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: Results from a Prospective Double-Center Trial JF Journal of Nuclear Medicine JO J Nucl Med FD Society of Nuclear Medicine SP 1855 OP 1861 DO 10.2967/jnumed.124.268065 VO 65 IS 12 A1 Jannusch, Kai A1 Umutlu, Lale A1 Kirchner, Julian A1 Bruckmann, Nils-Martin A1 Morawitz, Janna A1 Herrmann, Ken A1 Fendler, Wolfgang Peter A1 Bittner, Ann-Kathrin A1 Hoffmann, Oliver A1 Mohrmann, Svjetlana A1 Ruckhäberle, Eugen A1 Stuschke, Martin A1 Schmid, Werner A1 Giesel, Frederik A1 Häberle, Lena A1 Esposito, Irene A1 Budach, Wilfried A1 Grueneisen, Johannes A1 Matuschek, Christiane A1 Kowall, Bernd A1 Stang, Andreas A1 Antoch, Gerald A1 Buchbender, Christian YR 2024 UL http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/65/12/1855.abstract AB Our rationale was to investigate whether 18F-FDG PET/MRI in addition to (guideline-recommended) conventional staging leads to changes in therapeutic management in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer and compare the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/MRI with that of conventional staging for determining the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) stage. Methods: In this prospective, double-center study, 208 women with newly diagnosed, therapy-naïve invasive breast cancer were enrolled in accordance with the inclusion criteria. All patients underwent guideline-recommended conventional staging and whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI with a dedicated breast examination. A multidisciplinary tumor board served to determine 2 different therapy recommendations for each patient, one based on conventional staging alone and another based on combined assessment of conventional staging and 18F-FDG PET/MRI examinations. Major changes in therapy recommendations and differences between the conventional staging algorithm and 18F-FDG PET/MRI for determining the correct UICC stage were reported and evaluated. Results: Major changes in therapeutic management based on combined assessment of conventional staging and 18F-FDG PET/MRI were detected in 5 of 208 patients, amounting to changes in therapeutic management in 2.4% (95% CI, 0.78%–5.2%) of the study population. In determining the UICC stage, the guideline-based staging algorithm and 18F-FDG PET/MRI were concordant in 135 of 208 (64.9%; 95% CI, 58%–71.4%) patients. The conventional guideline algorithm correctly determined the UICC stage in 130 of 208 (62.5%; 95% CI, 55.5%–69.1%) patients, and 18F-FDG PET/MRI correctly determined the UICC stage in 170 of 208 (81.9%; 95% CI, 75.8%–86.7%) patients. Conclusion: Despite the diagnostic superiority of 18F-FDG PET/MRI over conventional staging in determining the correct UICC stage, the current (guideline-recommended) conventional staging algorithm is sufficient for adequate therapeutic management of patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer, and 18F-FDG PET/MRI does not have an impact on patient management.