• J. Nucl. Med. · Dec 2015

    Comparative Study

    Prospective Comparison of 99mTc-MDP Scintigraphy, Combined 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG PET/CT, and Whole-Body MRI in Patients with Breast and Prostate Cancer.

    • Ryogo Minamimoto, Andreas Loening, Mehran Jamali, Amir Barkhodari, Camila Mosci, Tatianie Jackson, Piotr Obara, Valentina Taviani, Sanjiv Sam Gambhir, Shreyas Vasanawala, and Andrei Iagaru.
    • Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and.
    • J. Nucl. Med. 2015 Dec 1; 56 (12): 1862-8.

    UnlabelledWe prospectively evaluated the use of combined (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT in patients with breast and prostate cancer and compared the results with those for (99m)Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy and whole-body MRI.MethodsThirty patients (15 women with breast cancer and 15 men with prostate cancer) referred for standard-of-care bone scintigraphy were prospectively enrolled in this study. (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT and whole-body MRI were performed after bone scintigraphy. The whole-body MRI protocol consisted of both unenhanced and contrast-enhanced sequences. Lesions detected with each test were tabulated, and the results were compared.ResultsFor extraskeletal lesions, (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT and whole-body MRI had no statistically significant differences in sensitivity (92.9% vs. 92.9%, P = 1.00), positive predictive value (81.3% vs. 86.7%, P = 0.68), or accuracy (76.5% vs. 82.4%, P = 0.56). However, (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT showed significantly higher sensitivity and accuracy than whole-body MRI (96.2% vs. 81.4%, P < 0.001, 89.8% vs. 74.7%, P = 0.01) and bone scintigraphy (96.2% vs. 64.6%, P < 0.001, 89.8% vs. 65.9%, P < 0.001) for the detection of skeletal lesions. Overall, (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT showed higher sensitivity and accuracy than whole-body MRI (95.7% vs. 83.3%, P < 0.002, 87.6% vs. 76.0%, P < 0.02) but not statistically significantly so when compared with a combination of whole-body MRI and bone scintigraphy (95.7% vs. 91.6%, P = 0.17, 87.6% vs. 83.0%, P = 0.53). (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT showed no significant difference from a combination of (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT and whole-body MRI. No statistically significant differences in positive predictive value were noted among the 3 examinations.Conclusion(18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT is superior to whole-body MRI and (99m)Tc-MDP scintigraphy for evaluation of skeletal disease extent. Further, (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT and whole-body MRI detected extraskeletal disease that may change the management of these patients. (18)F-NaF/(18)F-FDG PET/CT provides diagnostic ability similar to that of a combination of whole-body MRI and bone scintigraphy in patients with breast and prostate cancer. Larger cohorts are needed to confirm these preliminary findings, ideally using the newly introduced simultaneous PET/MRI scanners.© 2015 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Inc.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…