ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026
Diagnostic Performance of ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI PET/CT, ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, and Breast MRI for Assessing Tumor Extent and Axillary Metastasis in Breast Cancer: A Histopathology-Referenced Retrospective Study.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the diagnostic performance of ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI PET/CT, ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in assessing primary tumor size, detecting additional intramammary foci, and identifying axillary lymph node metastasis (ALNM) in patients with invasive breast cancer (IBC) undergoing upfront surgery without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), using postoperative histopathology as the reference standard.
methodsThis retrospective study included 60 IBC patients who underwent total mastectomy without NAC. All patients had preoperative ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI PET/CT, ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, and breast MRI. Primary tumor size, multifocality/multicentricity (MF/MC), and ALNM were evaluated for each modality. FAPI and FDG were additionally assessed for extra-axillary lymph nodes, internal mammary nodes, and distant metastases. Agreement between imaging- and pathology-based tumor size measurements, as well as the diagnostic performance for MF/MC and ALNM, were evaluated using correlation analyses and standard diagnostic accuracy metrics.
resultsMRI (ρ = 0.866) and ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI PET/CT (ρ = 0.844) demonstrated the strongest correlation with pathologic tumor size, whereas ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT showed lower agreement (ρ = 0.780). Breast MRI (45.0%) and ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI-PET/CT (38.3%) were significantly superior to ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT (18.3%) in detecting multifocal or multicentric disease (p < 0.001). For ALNM detection, breast MRI achieved the highest sensitivity (87.5%) but showed lower specificity (72.7%). In contrast, ⁶⁸Ga-FAPI PET/CT combined high sensitivity (81.2%) with perfect specificity (100.0%), outperforming ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, which demonstrated lower sensitivity (43.8%) despite high specificity (93.2%). Additionally, ⁶⁸Ga-FAPIPET/CT identified metastatic findings not detected by ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, including seven axillary lymph nodes (11.7%), 29 additional intramammary tumor foci (48.3%), and four distant metastases (6.7%).
conclusion⁶⁸Ga-FAPI PET/CT demonstrated higher diagnostic performance than ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and accuracy comparable to breast MRI for primary tumor size estimation and detection of multifocal or multicentric disease. FAPI-PET/CT also provided higher specificity than MRI for ALNM assessment and identified additional metastatic lesions not detected by FDG-PET/CT, supporting its potential role as a complementary modality to MRI and an alternative functional imaging technique in selected patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.