18F-Fluoride PET/CT is highly effective for excluding bone metastases even in patients with equivocal bone scintigraphy

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 39, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 1730-1736

  Bortot, Daniel C ^a   Amorim, Bárbara J ^a   Oki, Glaucia C ^a   Gapski, Sérgio B ^b   Santos, Allan O ^a   Lima, Mariana C L ^a   Etchebehere, Elba C S C ^a   Barboza, Marycel F ^c   Mengatti, Jair ^c   Ramos, Celso Dario ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^b Nuclear Medicine Clinic   (Brazil)

^c INSTITUTO DE PESQUISAS ENERGÉTICAS E NUCLEARES   (Brazil)

Author keywords

18F Fluoride; Bone scintigraphy; Nuclear medicine; Oncology; PET CT

Indexed keywords

FLUORINE 18; MEDRONATE TECHNETIUM TC 99M; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCINTILLATION CAMERA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WHOLE BODY SCINTISCANNING; BONE TUMOR; CLINICAL TRIAL; METASTASIS; MIDDLE AGED; SCINTISCANNING; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BONE NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS;

EID: 84868247267     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: 16197089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-012-2195-8     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Nicolini A, Ferrari P, Sagripanti A, Carpi A. The role of tumour markers in predicting skeletal metastases in breast cancer patients with equivocal bone scintigraphy. Br J Cancer. 1999;79(9-10):1443- 7. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6690230.
2. Talbot JN, Paycha F, Balogova S. Diagnosis of bone metastasis: recent comparative studies of imaging modalities. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;55(4):374-410.
3. Ndlovu X, George R, Ellmann A, Warwick J. Should SPECT-CT replace SPECT for the evaluation of equivocal bone scan lesions in patients with underlying malignancies? Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31(7):659-65. doi:10.1097/MNM. 0b013e3283399107.
4. Cook GJ, Fogelman I. The role of positron emission tomography in skeletal disease. Semin Nucl Med. 2001;31(1):50-61.
5. Silberstein EB, Saenger EL, Tofe AJ, Alexander Jr GW, Park HM. Imaging of bone metastases with 99mTc-Sn-EHDP (diphosphonate), 18F, and skeletal radiography. A comparison of sensitivity. Radiology. 1973;107(3):551-5.
6. Blau M, Nagler W, Bender MA. Fluorine-18: a new isotope for bone scanning. J Nucl Med. 1962;3:332-4.
7. Picchio M, Giovannini E, Messa C. The role of PET/computed tomography scan in the management of prostate cancer. Curr Opin Urol. 2011;21(3):230-6. doi:10.1097/MOU.0b013e328344e556.
8. Grant FD, Fahey FH, Packard AB, Davis RT, Alavi A, Treves ST. Skeletal PET with 18F-fluoride: applying new technology to an old tracer. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(1):68-78. doi:10.2967/ jnumed.106.037200.
9. Blake GM, Park-Holohan SJ, Cook GJ, Fogelman I. Quantitative studies of bone with the use of 18F-fluoride and 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate. Semin Nucl Med. 2001;31(1):28-49.
10. Li Y, Schiepers C, Lake R, Dadparvar S, Berenji GR. Clinical utility of (18)F-fluoride PET/CT in benign and malignant bone diseases. Bone. 2012;50(1):128-39. doi:10.1016/j.bone.2011.09.053.
11. Schiepers C, Nuyts J, Bormans G, Dequeker J, Bouillon R, Mortelmans L, et al. Fluoride kinetics of the axial skeletonmeasured in vivo with fluorine-18-fluoride PET. J NuclMed. 1997;38(12):1970-6.
12. Fogelman I, Cook G, Israel O, Van der Wall H. Positron emission tomography and bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med. 2005;35 (2):135-42. doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2004.11.005.
13. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Flusser G, Zuriel L, Kollender Y, Lerman H, et al. Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: initial experience with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18Ffluoride PET and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45 (2):272-8.
14. Withofs N, Grayet B, Tancredi T, Rorive A, Mella C, Giacomelli F, et al. 18F-fluoride PET/CT for assessing bone involvement in prostate and breast cancers. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32 (3):168-76. doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283412ef5.
15. Yen RF, Chen CY, Cheng MF, Wu YW, Shiau YC, Wu K, et al. The diagnostic and prognostic effectiveness of F-18 sodium fluoride PET-CT in detecting bone metastases for hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31(7):637-45. doi:10.1097/ MNM.0b013e3283399120.
16. Mattsson S, Soderberg M. Radiation dose management in CT, SPECT/CT and PET/CT techniques. Radiat Prot Dosim. 2011;147 (1-2):13-21. doi:10.1093/rpd/ ncr261.
17. Rodriguez-Vigil B, Gomez-Leon N, Pinilla I, Hernandez-Maraver D, Coya J, Martin-Curto L, et al. PET/CT in lymphoma: prospective study of enhanced full-dose PET/CT versus unenhanced lowdose PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(10):1643-8.
18. Pfluger T, Melzer HI, Schneider V, La Fougere C, Coppenrath E, Berking C, et al. PET/CT in malignant melanoma: contrast-enhanced CT versus plain low-dose CT. Eur J NuclMedMol Imaging. 2011;38 (5):822-31. doi:10.1007/s00259-010-1702- z.