PURPOSE: The clinical value of metaiodobenzylguanidine (mIBG) scintigraphy in patients with disseminated neuroblastoma (NB) at the time of diagnosis and after induction chemotherapy was evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records and imaging studies of 30 patients with stage 4 NB who underwent mIBG scintigraphy and 99mTc hydroxy methylene diphosphonate bone scintigraphy at the time of diagnosis were reviewed. Scores were calculated for the mIBG and bone scintigrams, and outcome according to the initial and follow-up imaging studies was determined. RESULTS: Discrepancies between bone scintigraphy and mIBG osteomedullary localization were seen in six patients. For the entire cohort, 2-year event-free survival did not significantly differ for the group of patients with initial mIBG or bone scintigraphy scores > or = 10 compared to those with scores < 10 (P = 0.23 and 0.61, respectively). However, for patients older than 1 year, a trend associating worse outcome with mIBG scores > or = 10 at diagnosis was seen (P = 0.08). A trend correlating abnormal mIBG scintigraphy after induction therapy and poor outcome was also observed (P = 0.09). Outcome did not correlate with the results of the bone scintigram studies performed after induction chemotherapy (P = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Because a discordance between mIBG and bone scintigraphy results were seen in a subset of stage 4 NB patients, both imaging studies should be performed at the time of diagnosis. mIBG imaging studies performed at the time of diagnosis and after induction chemotherapy may be of prognostic value, particularly in stage 4 patients older than 1 year.
PURPOSE: The clinical value of metaiodobenzylguanidine (mIBG) scintigraphy in patients with disseminated neuroblastoma (NB) at the time of diagnosis and after induction chemotherapy was evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records and imaging studies of 30 patients with stage 4 NB who underwent mIBG scintigraphy and 99mTc hydroxy methylene diphosphonate bone scintigraphy at the time of diagnosis were reviewed. Scores were calculated for the mIBG and bone scintigrams, and outcome according to the initial and follow-up imaging studies was determined. RESULTS: Discrepancies between bone scintigraphy and mIBG osteomedullary localization were seen in six patients. For the entire cohort, 2-year event-free survival did not significantly differ for the group of patients with initial mIBG or bone scintigraphy scores > or = 10 compared to those with scores < 10 (P = 0.23 and 0.61, respectively). However, for patients older than 1 year, a trend associating worse outcome with mIBG scores > or = 10 at diagnosis was seen (P = 0.08). A trend correlating abnormal mIBG scintigraphy after induction therapy and poor outcome was also observed (P = 0.09). Outcome did not correlate with the results of the bone scintigram studies performed after induction chemotherapy (P = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Because a discordance between mIBG and bone scintigraphy results were seen in a subset of stage 4 NB patients, both imaging studies should be performed at the time of diagnosis. mIBG imaging studies performed at the time of diagnosis and after induction chemotherapy may be of prognostic value, particularly in stage 4 patients older than 1 year.
Authors: Emilio Bombardieri; Cumali Aktolun; Richard P Baum; Angelika Bishof-Delaloye; John Buscombe; Jean François Chatal; Lorenzo Maffioli; Roy Moncayo; Luc Mortelmans; Sven N Reske Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Emilio Bombardieri; Francesco Giammarile; Cumali Aktolun; Richard P Baum; Angelika Bischof Delaloye; Lorenzo Maffioli; Roy Moncayo; Luc Mortelmans; Giovanna Pepe; Sven N Reske; Maria R Castellani; Arturo Chiti Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: K K Matthay; B Shulkin; R Ladenstein; J Michon; F Giammarile; V Lewington; A D J Pearson; S L Cohn Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-04-27 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Gregory A Yanik; Marguerite T Parisi; Barry L Shulkin; Arlene Naranjo; Susan G Kreissman; Wendy B London; Judith G Villablanca; John M Maris; Julie R Park; Susan L Cohn; Patrick McGrady; Katherine K Matthay Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Kara L Davis; Elizabeth Fox; Melinda S Merchant; Joel M Reid; Rachel A Kudgus; Xiaowei Liu; Charles G Minard; Stephan Voss; Stacey L Berg; Brenda J Weigel; Crystal L Mackall Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Gitta Bleeker; Godelieve A M Tytgat; Judit A Adam; Huib N Caron; Leontien C M Kremer; Lotty Hooft; Elvira C van Dalen Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2015-09-29
Authors: Gregory A Yanik; Marguerite T Parisi; Arlene Naranjo; Helen Nadel; Michael J Gelfand; Julie R Park; Ruth L Ladenstein; Ulrike Poetschger; Ariane Boubaker; Dominique Valteau-Couanet; Bieke Lambert; Maria-Rita Castellani; Zvi Bar-Sever; Aurore Oudoux; Anna Kaminska; Susan G Kreissman; Barry L Shulkin; Katherine K Matthay Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-09-08 Impact factor: 10.057