Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:7–33.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Giaquinto AN, Sung H, Miller KD, Kramer JL, Newman LA, Minihan A, et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:524–41.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

National cancer institue - Cancer Stat Facts: Female Breast Cancer Subtypes [Internet]. [cited 2023 Dec 12]. Available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast-subtypes.html

Gennari A, André F, Barrios CH, Cortés J, de Azambuja E, DeMichele A, et al. ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for the diagnosis, staging and treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer☆. Ann Oncol. 2021;32:1475–95.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Cardoso F, Kyriakides S, Ohno S, Penault-Llorca F, Poortmans P, Rubio IT, et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2019;30:1194–220.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Allison KH, Hammond MEH, Dowsett M, Mckernin SE, Carey LA. Estrogen and progesterone receptor testing in breast cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update special articles abstract. J Clin Oncol. 2021;38:1346–68.

Article  Google Scholar 

Kao JY, Tsai JH, Wu TY, Wang CK, Kuo YL. Receptor discordance and phenotype change in metastatic breast cancer. Asian J Surg. 2021;44:192–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Schrijver WAME, Suijkerbuijk KPM, Van Gils CH, Van Der Wall E, Moelans CB, Van Diest PJ. Receptor conversion in distant breast cancer metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018;110:568–80.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Aurilio G, Disalvatore D, Pruneri G, Bagnardi V, Viale G, Curigliano G, et al. A meta-analysis of oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 discordance between primary breast cancer and metastases. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:277–89.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Aurilio G, Monfardini L, Rizzo S, Sciandivasci A, Preda L, Bagnardi V, et al. Discordant hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status in bone metastases compared to primary breast cancer. Acta Oncol (Madr). 2013;52:1649–56.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Nienhuis HH, Van Kruchten M, Elias SG, Glaudemans AWJM, De Vries EFJ, Bongaertsy AHH, et al. 18F-fluoroestradiol tumor uptake is heterogeneous and influenced by site of metastasis in breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med. 2018;59:1212–8.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Sari E, Guler G, Hayran M, Gullu I, Altundag K, Ozisik Y. Comparative study of the immunohistochemical detection of hormone receptor status and HER-2 expression in primary and paired recurrent/metastatic lesions of patients with breast cancer. Med Oncol. 2011;28:57–63.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hoefnagel LDC, van de Vijver MJ, van Slooten HJ, Wesseling P, Wesseling J, Westenend PJ, et al. Receptor conversion in distant breast cancer metastases. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12:R75.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Walter V, Fischer C, Deutsch TM, Ersing C, Nees J, Schütz F, et al. Estrogen, progesterone, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 discordance between primary and metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020;183:137–44.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kurland BF, Peterson LM, Lee JH, Linden HM, Schubert EK, Dunnwald LK, et al. Between-patient and within-patient (site-to-site) variability in estrogen receptor binding, measured in vivo by 18F-fluoroestradiol PET. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1541–9.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Lindström LS, Karlsson E, Wilking UM, Johansson U, Hartman J, Lidbrink EK, et al. Clinically used breast cancer markers such as estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 are unstable throughout tumor progression. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2601–8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Hammond MEH, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, Allred DC, Hagerty KL, Badve S, et al. American society of clinical oncology/college of american pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2784–95.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Elmore JG, Longton GM, Carney PA, Geller BM, Onega T, Tosteson ANA, et al. Diagnostic concordance among pathologists interpreting breast biopsy specimens. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2015;313:1122–32.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Jackson SL, Frederick PD, Pepe MS, Nelson HD, Weaver DL, Allison KH, et al. Diagnostic reproducibility: what happens when the same pathologist interprets the same breast biopsy specimen at two points in time? Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:1234–41.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Evangelista L, Vittoria Dieci M, Guarneri V, Franco CP. 18F-fluoroestradiol positron emission tomography in breast cancer patients: systematic review of the literature & meta-analysis. Curr Radiopharm. 2016;9:244–57.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chae SY, Ahn SH, Kim SB, Han S, Lee SH, Oh SJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy and safety of 16α-[18 F]fluoro-17β-oestradiol PET-CT for the assessment of oestrogen receptor status in recurrent or metastatic lesions in patients with breast cancer: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20:546–55.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Kurland BF, Wiggins JR, Coche A, Fontan C, Bouvet Y, Webner P, et al. Whole-body characterization of estrogen receptor status in metastatic breast cancer with 16α-18F-fluoro-17β-estradiol positron emission tomography: meta-analysis and recommendations for integration into clinical applications. Oncologist. 2020;25:835–44.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Van Geel JJL, Boers J, Elias SG, Glaudemans AWJM, De Vries EFJ, Hospers GAP, et al. Clinical validity of 16α-[18F]fluoro-17β-estradiol positron emission tomography/computed tomography to assess estrogen receptor status in newly diagnosed metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2022;53:1.

Google Scholar 

Van Kruchten M, Glaudemans AWJM, De Vries EFJ, Beets-Tan RGH, Schröder CP, Dierckx RA, et al. PET imaging of estrogen receptors as a diagnostic tool for breast cancer patients presenting with a clinical dilemma. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:182–90.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Chae SY, Son HJ, Lee DY, Shin E, Oh JS, Seo SY, et al. Comparison of diagnostic sensitivity of [18F]fluoroestradiol and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for breast cancer recurrence in patients with a history of estrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer. EJNMMI Res. 2020;10:1.

Article  Google Scholar 

O’Brien SR, Edmonds CE, Lanzo SM, Weeks JK, Mankoff DA, Pantel AR. 18F-fluoroestradiol: current applications and future directions. Radiographics. 2023;43:1.

Article  Google Scholar 

Linden HM, Stekhova SA, Link JM, Gralow JR, Livingston RB, Ellis GK, et al. Quantitative fluoroestradiol positron emission tomography imaging predicts response to endocrine treatment in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2793–9.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ulaner GA, Jhaveri K, Chandarlapaty S, Hatzoglou V, Riedl CC, Lewis JS, et al. Head-to-head evaluation of 18F-FES and 18F-FDG PET/CT in metastatic invasive lobular breast cancer. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:326–31.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Venema CM, Apollonio G, Hospers GAP, Schröder CP, Dierckx RAJO, De Vries EFJ, et al. Recommendations and technical aspects of 16α-[18F]Fluoro-17β-Estradiol PET to image the estrogen receptor in vivo. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;41:844–51.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ulaner GA, Mankoff DA, Clark AS, Fowler AM, Linden HM, Peterson LM, et al. Summary: appropriate use criteria for estrogen receptor-targeted PET imaging with 16a–18F-fluoro-17b-fluoroestradiol. J Nucl Med. 2023;64:351–4.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Boers J, Loudini N, de Haas RJ, Willemsen ATM, van der Vegt B, de Vries EGE, et al. Analyzing the estrogen receptor status of liver metastases with [18 f]-fes-pet in patients with breast cancer. Diagnostics. 2021;11:1.

Article  Google Scholar 

Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1983;3:1–7.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Patlak CS, Blasberg RG. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. Generalizations. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1985;5:584–90.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Laffon E, Marthan R. Is Patlak y-intercept a relevant metrics? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:1287–90.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Dias AH, Pedersen MF, Danielsen H, Munk OL, Gormsen LC. Clinical feasibility and impact of fully automated multiparametric PET imaging using direct Patlak reconstruction: evaluation of 103 dynamic whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:837–50.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Peterson LM, Mankoff DA, Lawton T, Yagle K, Schubert EK, Stekhova S, et al. Quantitative imaging of estrogen receptor expression in breast cancer with PET and 18F-fluoroestradiol. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:367–74.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Linden HM, Kurland BF, Peterson LM, Schubert EK, Gralow JR, Specht JM, et al. Fluoroestradiol positron emission tomography reveals differences in pharmacodynamics of aromatase inhibitors, tamoxifen, and fulvestrant in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:4799–805.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kurland BF, Peterson LM, Lee JH, Schubert EK, Currin ER, Link JM, et al. Estrogen receptor binding (18F-FES PE