FDG PET/CT of primary bone tumors

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 202, Issue 6, 2014, Pages

  Costelloe, Colleen M ^a   Chuang, Hubert H ^a   Madewell, John E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bone; FDG; Malignancy; PET CT; Tumor

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

BENIGN TUMOR; BONE TUMOR; CANCER MORPHOLOGY; CANCER STAGING; CARTILAGE INJURY; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DRUG UPTAKE; DUAL TIME POINT IMAGING; HUMAN; METABOLISM; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TREATMENT RESPONSE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AUTOMATED PATTERN RECOGNITION; CHILD; FEMALE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BONE NEOPLASMS; CHILD; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM STAGING; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84904117383     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.13.11833     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Costelloe CM, Madewell JE. Radiography in the initial diagnosis of primary bone tumors. AJR 2013; 200:3-7
2. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Heymer B, et al. Grading of tumors and tumorlike lesions of bone: evaluation by FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2000; 41:1695-1701
3. Aoki J, Watanabe H, Shinozaki T, et al. FDG PET of primary benign and malignant bone tumors: standardized uptake value in 52 lesions. Radiology 2001; 219:774-777 (Pubitemid 32476270)
4. Tian R, Su M, Tian Y, et al. Dual-time point PET/CT with F-18 FDG for the differentiation of malignant and benign bone lesions. Skeletal Radiol 2009; 38:451-458
5. Costelloe CM, Chuang HH, Chasen BA, et al. Bone windows for distinguishing malignant from benign primary bone tumors on FDG PET/CT. J Cancer 2013; 4:524-530
6. 18F-FDG PET studies for the differentiation of malignant and benign bone lesions. J Nucl Med 2002; 43:510-518
7. 18FDG-PET applications for cartilage neoplasms. Skeletal Radiol 2005; 34:367-374
8. Aoki J, Watanabe H, Shinozaki T, Tokunaga M, Inoue T, Endo K. FDG-PET in differential diagnosis and grading of chondrosarcomas. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23:603-608 (Pubitemid 29337158)
9. 18F-FDG-PET/CT in benign and malignant musculoskeletal tumors. Ann Nucl Med 2008; 22:603-609
10. Hermoye A, Malghem J, Lecouvet F, Goffin E, Lonneux M, Lhommel R. F-18 FDG PET/CT as a noninvasive diagnostic and follow-up tool in brown tumors due to secondary hyper-parathyroidism. Clin Nucl Med 2009; 34:330-332
11. Madewell JE, Ragsdale BD, Sweet DE. Radiologic and pathologic analysis of solitary bone lesions. Part I. Internal margins. Radiol Clin North Am 1981; 19:715-748 (Pubitemid 12191135)
12. Costelloe CM, Dickson K, Cody DD, Hernandez M, DeMouy EH. Computed tomography reformation in evaluation of fracture healing with metallic fixation: correlation with clinical outcome. J Trauma 2008; 65:1421-1424
13. Murphey MD, Flemming DJ, Boyea SR, Bojescul JA, Sweet DE, Temple HT. Enchondroma versus chondrosarcoma in the appendicular skeleton: differentiating features. RadioGraphics 1998; 18:1213-1237; quiz, 1244-1215
14. Costelloe CM, Chuang HH, Madewell JE, Ueno NT. Cancer response criteria and bone metastases: RECIST 1.1, MDA and PERCIST. J Cancer 2010; 1:80-92
15. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45:228-247
16. Lawrence JA, Babyn PS, Chan HS, Thorner PS, Pron GE, Krajbich IJ. Extremity osteosarcoma in childhood: prognostic value of radiologic imaging. Radiology 1993; 189:43-47 (Pubitemid 23292919)
17. Hamada K, Tomita Y, Inoue A, et al. Evaluation of chemotherapy response in osteosarcoma with FDG-PET. Ann Nucl Med 2009; 23:89-95
18. Miller SL, Hoffer FA, Reddick WE, et al. Tumor volume or dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prediction of clinical outcome of Ewing sarcoma family of tumors. Pediatr Radiol 2001; 31:518-523 (Pubitemid 32611404)
19. Denecke T, Hundsdorfer P, Misch D, et al. Assessment of histological response of paediatric bone sarcomas using FDG PET in comparison to morphological volume measurement and standardized MRI parameters. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37:1842-1853
20. Brisse H, Ollivier L, Edeline V, et al. Imaging of malignant tumours of the long bones in children: monitoring response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and preoperative assessment. Pediatr Radiol 2004; 34:595-605 (Pubitemid 39162242)
21. 18F-FDG PET/CT indices, after one course and at the completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in children and young adults with osteosarcoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39:39-49
22. 18F-FDG PET/CT as an indicator of progression-free and overall survival in osteosarcoma. J Nucl Med 2009; 50:340-347
23. 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate uptake in primary osteosarcoma. J Nucl Med 2002; 43:1012-1017
24. Bajpai J, Kumar R, Sreenivas V, et al. Prediction of chemotherapy response by PET-CT in osteosarcoma: correlation with histologic necrosis. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2011; 33:e271-e278
25. Kim DH, Kim SY, Lee HJ, et al. Assessment of chemotherapy response using FDG-PET in pediatric bone tumors: a single institution experience. Cancer Res Treat 2011; 43:170-175
26. 18F-FDG PET response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma and osteosarcoma are different. Skeletal Radiol 2011; 40:1007-1015
27. 18F-FDG PET and MRI. J Nucl Med 2009; 50:1435-1440
28. 18F] Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts outcome for Ewing sarcoma family of tumors. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:8828-8834
29. Hawkins DS, Conrad EU 3rd, Butrynski JE, Schuetze SM, Eary JF. [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography response is associated with outcome for extremity osteosarcoma in children and young adults. Cancer 2009; 115:3519-3525
30. 18F-FDG-PET. Ann Nucl Med 2008; 22:475-480
31. Gupta K, Pawaskar A, Basu S, et al. Potential role of FDG PET imaging in predicting metastatic potential and assessment of therapeutic response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in Ewing sarcoma family of tumors. Clin Nucl Med 2011; 36:973-977
32. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Werner M, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy response of osteogenic sarcoma using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1999; 40:1637-1643 (Pubitemid 29471153)
33. Raymond AK, Chawla SP, Carrasco CH, et al. Osteosarcoma chemotherapy effect: a prognostic factor. Semin Diagn Pathol 1987; 4:212-236
34. Newman EN, Jones RL, Hawkins DS. An evaluation of [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography, bone scan, and bone marrow aspiration/biopsy as staging investigations in Ewing sarcoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2013; 60:1113-1117
35. Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Wagner-Bohn A, et al. FDG-PET for detection of recurrences from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with conventional imaging. Ann Oncol 2002; 13:157-160 (Pubitemid 34436740)
36. Gerth HU, Juergens KU, Dirksen U, Gerss J, Schober O, Franzius C. Significant benefit of multimodal imaging: PET/CT compared with PET alone in staging and follow-up of patients with Ewing tumors. J Nucl Med 2007; 48:1932-1939 (Pubitemid 350237602)
37. Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Sciuk J, et al. FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with spiral CT. Ann Oncol 2001; 12:479-486 (Pubitemid 32472101)
38. 18F-FDG PET/CT compared to conventional imaging modalities in pediatric primary bone tumors. Pediatr Radiol 2012; 42:418-430
39. 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med 2006; 47:1059-1066
40. Boellaard R, Oyen WJ, Hoekstra CJ, et al. The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35:2320-2333
41. 18F-FDG PET imaging detects breast cancer with high sensitivity and correlates well with histologic subtypes. J Nucl Med 2006; 47:1440-1446
42. Hustinx R, Smith RJ, Benard F, et al. Dual time point fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: a potential method to differentiate malignancy from inflammation and normal tissue in the head and neck. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26:1345-1348 (Pubitemid 29467031)
43. 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med 2002; 43:871-875
44. 18F-FDG-PET imaging in the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 2005; 26:315-321
45. 18FDG uptake in soft tissue masses. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26:22-30
46. Schillaci O. Use of dual-point fluorodeoxyglucose imaging to enhance sensitivity and specificity. Semin Nucl Med 2012; 42:267-280
47. 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35:2000-2008
48. Wiesmüller M, Quick HH, Navalpakkam B, et al. Comparison of lesion detection and quantitation of tracer uptake between PET from a simultaneously acquiring whole-body PET/MR hybrid scanner and PET from PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40:12-21
49. 18F-FDG PET SUVmax as an indicator of histopathologic response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in extremity osteosarcoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40:728-736
50. Costelloe CM, Raymond AK, Fitzgerald NE, et al. Tumor necrosis in osteosarcoma: inclusion of the point of greatest metabolic activity from F-18 FDG PET/CT in the histopathologic analysis. Skeletal Radiol 2010; 39:131-140
51. Catana C, Guimaraes AR, Rosen BR. PET and MR imaging: the odd couple or a match made in heaven? J Nucl Med 2013; 54:815-824