False-Positive Results of Radionuclide Imaging in
Lactating Breasts: a
pharmacovigilance perspective
Vojislav
Kišić1 and Jennifer Parish2
1University of Belgrade School of Medicine, Dr.
Subotića 8, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia.
2IQVIA, Leskoškova cesta 2, 1000 Ljubljana,
Slovenia.
Received March
2, 2020; Revised March 20, 2020; Accepted April, 2020
Background: Misleading
diagnostic results, including false-positives, potentially impact both the
safety and efficacy profiles of radiopharmaceuticals used for diagnostic purposes. It is unclear, however, if false-positives
occurring with radio-pharmaceuticals in lactating breasts are regularly reported as adverse events.
Methods: Scientific medical literature
(PubMed and Google Scholar) and the EudraVigilance database of
suspected adverse drug reaction reports
were searched for case reports of false-positives with radiopharmaceuticals appearing in lactating breasts. Medical
Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) was reviewed for terms that
could be used to capture reports of false-positives
occurring in breast nuclear imaging accurately.
Results: Literature searches showed
that 40 case reports of false-positives have been observed with radiopharmaceuticals in lactating breasts but that these do not
appear to be consistently reported to EudraVigilance as adverse events. MedDRA
did not contain terms suitable for capturing false-positives in breasts with radiopharmaceuticals, but newly
proposed terms were all approved.
Conclusion: Increased
reporting of false-positives as adverse events could help further clarify the
safety specification of radiopharmaceuticals.
KEYWORDS:
Radiotracers;
lactation; pharmacovigilance; adverse events; false-positives.
Copyright © 2020 by the author(s). Licensee Global Clinical
and Translational Research. This is an open-access article distributed under
the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCBY4.0,
https:// creative-commons.org /licenses /by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is
properly cited.
How to cite this article:
Kisic V, Parish J. False-positive results of
radionuclide imaging in lactating breasts: a pharmacovigilance perspective.
Glob Clin Transl Res. 2020; 2 (2): 38-45. DOI:10.36316/gcatr.01.0029.
1.
International
Atomic Energy Agency. Human Health Campus - Nuclear Medicine [Internet]. [cited
2020 Mar 27]. Available from: https://humanhealth.iaea.org/HHW/NuclearMedicine/index.html.
2.
Council
Regulation (EC) 2008/104/EC of November 19, 2008 on the Community code relating
to medicinal products for human use. Core EU Legis. 2015;426–9. Available from:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32001L0083&from=EN.
3.
The
Radiochemistry Society. Nuclear Medicine: Radiopharmaceuticals Definition
[Internet]. [cited 2018 Dec 18]. Available from: http://www.radiochemistry.org/nuclearmedicine/radiopharm_define.shtml.
4.
U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for
Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Center for Biologics Evaluation and
Research (CBER). FDA Guidance for Industry. Developing Medical Imaging Drug and
Biological Products. Part 1: Conducting Safety Assessments [Internet]. 2004.
Available from: https://www.fda.gov/media/71212/download.
5.
Mammě M,
Citraro R, Torcasio G, Cusato G, Palleria C, di Paola ED. Pharmacovigilance in
pharmaceutical companies: An overview. J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2013 Dec; 4(Suppl1):
S33–7. DOI:10.4103/0976-500X.120945.
6.
International
Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of
Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. Multidisciplinary Guidelines M3 (R2) —Guideline
on Nonclinical Safety Studies for the Conduct of Human Clinical Trials and
Marketing Authorization for Pharmaceutical [Internet]. Available from: https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/M3_R2__Guideline.pdf. Accessed on April 1, 2020.
7.
International
Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of
Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. Multidisciplinary Guidelines E8 - General
Considerations for Clinical Trials [Internet]. Available from: https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/E8_Guideline.pdf. Accessed on April 1, 2020.
8.
Assi HA,
Khoury KE, Dbouk H, Khalil LE, Mouhieddine TH, El Saghir NS. Epidemiology and
prognosis of breast cancer in young women. J Thorac Dis. 2013 Jun; 5 Suppl 1: S2-8.
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2013.05.24.
9.
Helwick C.
PET Scans Not Recommended for Most Patients with Breast Cancer: Potential New
Controversy in Breast Cancer Testing. Am Health and Drug Benefits 2010; 3(2):148.
Available from: http://www.ahdbonline.com/issues/2010/march-april-2010-vol-3-no-2/93-article-93.
10.
Shin KM,
Kim HJ, Jung SJ, Lim HS, Lee SW, Cho SH, et al. Incidental Breast Lesions
Identified by 18 F-FDG PET/CT: Which Clinical Variables Differentiate
between Benign and Malignant Breast Lesions? J Breast Cancer. 2015; 18(1):73. DOI:10.4048/jbc.2015.18.1.73.
11.
Dong A,
Wang Y, Lu J, Zuo C. Spectrum of the Breast Lesions with Increased 18F-FDG
Uptake on PET/CT: Clin Nucl Med. 2016 Jul;41(7):543–57. DOI:10.1097/RLU.0000000000001203
12.
Bhattacharya
A, Kamaleshwaran K, Mittal B, Gayana S. Unilateral breast uptake of Tc-99m
pertechnetate in a patient with a cold nodule of the thyroid. World J Nucl Med.
2012; 11(2):79. DOI:10.4103/1450-1147.103423.
13.
Tc 99m
Sestamibi Drug Result Page. In: MICROMEDEX [database on the Internet].
Greenwood Village (CO): Truven Health Analytics; publication year [2019].
Available from: www.micromedexsolutions.com. Subscription required to view.
14.
Gallium Citrate
Ga 67 Drug Result Page. In: MICROMEDEX [database on the Internet]. Greenwood
Village (CO): Truven Health Analytics; publication year [2019]. Available from:
www.micromedexsolutions.com. Subscription required to view.
15.
Hyatt HW,
Zhang Y, Hood WR, Kavazis AN. Lactation has persistent effects on a mother's
metabolism and mitochondrial function. Sci Rep. 2017 December 7;7(1):1–13. DOI:10.1038/s41598-017-17418-7
16.
The
European Medicines Agency. Guideline on core SmPC and the package leaflet for
fludeoxyglucose [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2018 Dec 10]. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-core-summary-product-characteristics-package-leaflet-fludeoxyglucose-18f_en.pdf.
17.
The
European Medicines Agency. EU Individual Case Safety Report (ICSR)1
Implementation Guide. [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/regulatory-procedural-guideline/european-union-individual-case-safety-report-icsr-implementation-guide_en.pdf.
18. The European Medicines Agency. Guideline on good pharmacovigilance
practices (GVP) - Module VI – Collection, management and submission of reports
of suspected adverse reactions to medicinal products (Rev 2) [Internet]. 2017.
Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/regulatory-procedural-guideline/guideline-good-pharmacovigilance-practices-gvp-module-vi-collection-management-submission-reports_en.pdf.
19.
MedDRA®
Term Selection: Points to Consider ICH-Endorsed Guide for MedDRA Users
[Internet]. [cited 2019 21 January]. Available from: http://www.mssotools.com/mssoweb/PTC/v211/000240_ts_ptc_r416.html.
20.
The
European Medicines Agency. Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP)
Annex I - Definitions (Rev 4) [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-good-pharmacovigilance-practices-annex-i-definitions-rev-4_en.pdf.
21.
Ko KH, Jung
HK, Jeon TJ. Diffuse Intense 18F-FDG Uptake at PET in Unilateral Breast Related
to Breastfeeding Practice. Korean J Radiol. 2013; 14(3):400. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2013.14.3.400
22.
Hendler D,
Stemmer SM. Uncommon Reason for High Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission
Tomography Uptake. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Nov 10; 28(32): e659–60. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.29.5543
23.
Sutter CW, Stadalnik
RC. Noncardiac uptake of technetium-99m sestamibi: an updated gamut. Semin Nucl
Med. 1996 Apr; 26(2):135–40. DOI: 10.1016/s0001-2998(96)80035-3
24.
Ceyrat Q,
Ziade C, Tlili G, Fernandez P, Meyer M. Galactocele, Pitfall for the Evaluation
by 18F-FDG PET/CT: Clin Nucl Med. 2018 Jul;43(7): e237–8. DOI:
10.1097/RLU.0000000000002119
25.
Abhyankar
A, Joshi J, Basu S. FDG Uptake in Unilateral Breast Related to Breastfeeding
Practice in a Patient of Pulmonary Hydatid Cyst: Clin Nucl Med. 2012
Jul;37(7):676–8. DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e31824d210d.
26.
Li T, Tian
J, Wang H, Chen Z, Zhao C. Pitfalls in positron emission tomography/computed
tomography imaging: causes and their classifications. Chin Med Sci J Chung-Kuo
Hsueh Ko Hsueh Tsa Chih. 2009 Mar; 24(1):12–9. DOI: 10.1016/s1001-9294(09)60052-3.
27.
Shor M,
Dave N, Reddy M, Ali A. Asymmetric FDG uptake in a lactating breast. Clin Nucl
Med. 2002 Jul; 27(7):536. DOI: 10.1097/00003072-200207000-00019
28.
Yasuda S,
Fujii H, Takahashi W, Takagi S, Ide M, Shohtsu A. Lactating breast exhibiting
high F-18 FDG uptake. Clin Nucl Med. 1998 Nov; 23(11):767–8. DOI:
10.1097/00003072-199811000-00010
29.
Jain S,
Sharma P, Mukherjee A, Bal C, Kumar R. “Witch’s milk” and 99mTc-pertechnetate
uptake in neonatal breast tissue: an uncommon but not unexpected finding. Clin
Nucl Med. 2013 Jul; 38(7):586–7. DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e318292aaba.
30.
Grove N,
Zheng M, Bristow RE, Eskander RN. Extensive Tattoos Mimicking Lymphatic
Metastasis on Positron Emission Tomography Scan in a Patient with Cervical
Cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jul; 126(1):182–5. 30. DOI:
10.1097/AOG.0000000000000701.
31.
Tanabe Y,
Sugiura K, Fujii S, Sugihara S, Ogawa T. Unilateral intense breast accumulation
of ga-67 resulting from breast feeding. Clin Nucl Med. 2005 Dec; 30(12):801–3. DOI:
10.1097/01.rlu.0000187514.99254.0e.
32.
Gupta R,
Tripathi M, Sahoo M, Nazar A, Agarwal K, Kumar K, et al. Asymmetrical F-18
Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in the breasts: A dilemma solved by patient history.
Indian J Nucl Med. 2016; 31(1):83. 32. DOI: 10.4103/0972-3919.172377.
33.
European
Medicines Agency Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). Draft
Guideline on Clinical Evaluation of Diagnostic Agents [Internet]. 2008.
Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/scientific-guideline/draft-guideline-clinical-evaluation-diagnostic-agents_en.pdf33.
34.
European
Medicines Agency. Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP) Module V
– Risk management systems (Rev 2) [Internet]. 2017. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-good-pharmacovigilance-practices-module-v-risk-management-systems-rev-2_en.pdf34.
35.
WebCR |
MedDRA MSSO [Internet]. [Cited 2019 21 January]. Available from: https://mssotools.com/webcr.