Literature DB >> 11752076

Prospective evaluation of the clinical value of planar bone scans, SPECT, and (18)F-labeled NaF PET in newly diagnosed lung cancer.

H Schirrmeister1, G Glatting, J Hetzel, K Nüssle, C Arslandemir, A K Buck, K Dziuk, A Gabelmann, S N Reske, M Hetzel.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Previous studies have shown that vertebral bone metastases (BM) not seen on planar bone scintigraphy (BS) might be present on (18)F-fluoride PET scans or at MRI. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of SPECT or (18)F-labeled NaF PET ((18)F PET) imaging on the management of patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer.
METHODS: Fifty-three patients with small cell lung cancer or locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer were prospectively examined with planar BS, SPECT of the vertebral column, and (18)F PET. MRI and all available imaging methods, as well as the clinical course, were used as reference methods. BS with and without SPECT and (18)F PET were compared using a 5-point scale for receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS: Twelve patients had BM. BS produced 6 false-negatives, SPECT produced 1 false-negative, and (18)F PET produced no false-negatives. The area under the ROC curve was 0.779 for BS, 0.944 for SPECT, and 0.993 for (18)F PET. The areas under the ROC curve of (18)F PET and BS complemented by SPECT were not significantly different, and both tomographic methods were significantly more accurate than planar BS. As a result of SPECT or (18)F PET imaging, clinical management was changed in 5 patients (9%) or 6 patients (11%), respectively.
CONCLUSION: As indicated by the area under the ROC curve analysis, (18)F PET is the most accurate whole-body imaging modality for screening for BM. Routinely performed SPECT imaging is practicable, is cost-effective, and improves the accuracy of BS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11752076

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  69 in total

1.  Comparison of hybrid 68Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and 99mTc-DPD-SPECT/CT for the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients: Additional value of morphologic information from low dose CT.

Authors:  Jan-Carlo Janssen; Sebastian Meißner; Nadine Woythal; Vikas Prasad; Winfried Brenner; Gerd Diederichs; Bernd Hamm; Marcus R Makowski
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  The improved accuracy of planar bone scintigraphy by adding single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT-CT) to detect skeletal metastases from prostate cancer.

Authors:  L C McLoughlin; F O'Kelly; C O'Brien; M Sheikh; J Feeney; W Torreggiani; J A Thornhill
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 1.568

3.  Is 11C-choline the most appropriate tracer for prostate cancer? Against.

Authors:  Klaus Zöphel; Jörg Kotzerke
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-04-02       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 4.  Non-FDG PET in oncology.

Authors:  R Núñez Miller; M A Pozo
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.405

5.  Choline PET/CT compared with bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients.

Authors:  Mohsen Beheshti; Werner Langsteger
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-01-19       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  The kinetics and reproducibility of 18F-sodium fluoride for oncology using current PET camera technology.

Authors:  Karen A Kurdziel; Joanna H Shih; Andrea B Apolo; Liza Lindenberg; Esther Mena; Yolanda Y McKinney; Stephen S Adler; Baris Turkbey; William Dahut; James L Gulley; Ravi A Madan; Ola Landgren; Peter L Choyke
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Prospective comparison of combined 18F-FDG and 18F-NaF PET/CT vs. 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging for detection of malignancy.

Authors:  Frank I Lin; Jyotsna E Rao; Erik S Mittra; Kavitha Nallapareddy; Alka Chengapa; David W Dick; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir; Andrei Iagaru
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Combined 18F-fluoride and 18F-FDG PET/CT: a response based on actual data from prospective studies.

Authors:  Andrei Iagaru; Camila Mosci; David W Dick; Mike Sathekge; Paula Lapa; Joao M de Lima; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-09-21       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 9.  Fluorinated tracers for imaging cancer with positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Olivier Couturier; André Luxen; Jean-François Chatal; Jean-Philippe Vuillez; Pierre Rigo; Roland Hustinx
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-07-06       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  (18)F and (18)FDG PET imaging of osteosarcoma to non-invasively monitor in situ changes in cellular proliferation and bone differentiation upon MYC inactivation.

Authors:  Constadina Arvanitis; Pavan K Bendapudi; Jeffrey R Tseng; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir; Dean W Felsher
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2008-12-07       Impact factor: 4.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.