Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Evaluation of radiographic and metabolic changes in bone metastases in response to systemic therapy with 18FDG-PET/CT Cover

Evaluation of radiographic and metabolic changes in bone metastases in response to systemic therapy with 18FDG-PET/CT

Radiology and Oncology
Volume 49 (2015): Issue 2 (June 2015)
By: Bengul Gunalp,  Ali Ozan Oner,  Semra Ince,  Engin Alagoz,  Aslı Ayan and  Nuri Arslan  
Open Access
|Mar 2015

References

  1. 1. Du Y, Cullum I, Illidge TM, Ell PJ. Fusion of metabolic function and morphology: sequential [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positronemission tomography/ computed tomography studies yield new insights into the natural history of bone metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 3440-7.10.1200/JCO.2007.11.2854
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. 2. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, Hortobagyi GN, Ueno NT. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 2942-53.10.1200/JCO.2004.08.181
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. 3. Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, Yeung HW, Cristofanilli M, Macapinlac HA. Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT. Radiology 2008; 247: 189-96.10.1148/radiol.2471070567
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. 4. Bellamy EA, Nicholas D, Ward M, Coombes RC, Powles TJ, Husband JE. Comparison of computed tomography and conventional radiology in the assessment of treatment response of lytic bony metastases in patients with carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol 1987; 38: 351-5.10.1016/S0009-9260(87)80207-6
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. 5. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 228-47.10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.02619097774
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. 6. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 122S-50S.10.2967/jnumed.108.057307275524519403881
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. 7. Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 496-507.10.1056/NEJMra05027616452561
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. 8. Evangelista L, Panunzio A, Polverosi R, Ferretti A, Chondrogiannis S, Pomerri F, et al. Early bone marrow metastasis detection: the additional value of FDG-PET/CT vs. CT imaging. Biomed Pharmacother 2012; 66: 448-53.10.1016/j.biopha.2012.06.00422902054
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. 9. Qu X, Huang X, Yan W, Wu L, Dai K. A meta-analysis of ¹⁸FDG-PET-CT, ¹⁸FDGPET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 1007-15.10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.12621354739
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. 10. Yang HL, Liu T, Wang XM, Xu Y, Deng SM. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing ¹⁸FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. Eur Radiol 2011; 21: 2604-17.10.1007/s00330-011-2221-421887484
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. 11. Ben-Haim S, Israel O. Breast cancer: Role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 2009; 39: 408-15.10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2009.05.00219801220
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. 12. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: Differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3375-9.10.1200/JCO.1998.16.10.33759779715
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. 13. Schirrmeister H. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by positron emission tomography. Radiol Clin North Am 2007; 45: 669-76.10.1016/j.rcl.2007.05.00717706531
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. 14. Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, Aramaki T, Morimoto N, Endo M. Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1266-73.10.2214/ajr.184.4.0184126615788608
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. 15. Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, Yeung HW, Cristofanilli M, Macapinlac HA. Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT. Radiology 2008; 247: 189-96.10.1148/radiol.247107056718372468
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. 16. Du Y, Cullum I, Illidge TM, Ell PJ. Fusion of metabolic function and morphology: sequential [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/ computed tomography studies yield new insights into the natural history of bone metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 3440-7.10.1200/JCO.2007.11.285417592153
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. 17. Lipton A. Pathophysiology of bone metastases: How this knowledge may lead to therapeutic intervention. J Support Oncol 2004; 2: 205-22.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. 18. Basu S,Torigian D, Alavi A. Evolving concept of imaging bone marrow metastasis in the twenty-first century: critical role of FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35: 465-71.10.1007/s00259-007-0593-017955239
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. 19. Ben-Haim S, Israel O. Breast cancer: Role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 2009; 39: 408-15.10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2009.05.002
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. 20. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: Differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3375-9.10.1200/JCO.1998.16.10.3375
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. 21. Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, Aramaki T, Morimoto N, Endo M, et al: Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1266-73.10.2214/ajr.184.4.01841266
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. 22. Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T, Yamada K, Ushijima Y, Taniike K, et al: Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 1253-8.10.1007/s00259-005-1842-816133397
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. 23. Abe K, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Koga H, Baba S, Hayashi K, et al: Comparison of 18FDG-PET with 99mTc-HMDP scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med 2005; 19: 573-79.10.1007/BF0298505016363622
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. 24. An YS, Yoon JK, Lee MH, Joh CW, Yoon SN. False negative F-18 FDG PET/CT in nonsmall cell lung cancer bone metastases. Clin Nucl Med 2005; 30: 203-4.10.1097/00003072-200503000-0001715722832
    Search in Google Scholar
  25. 25. von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC, Hany TF: Integrated PET/CT: Current applications and future directions. Radiology 2006; 238: 405-22.10.1148/radiol.238204197716436809
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/raon-2015-0012 | Journal eISSN: 1581-3207 | Journal ISSN: 1318-2099
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 115 - 120
Submitted on: Dec 18, 2014
|
Accepted on: Feb 9, 2015
|
Published on: Mar 25, 2015
Published by: Association of Radiology and Oncology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
bone metastases,
therapy response,
18FDG-PET/CT
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Clinical medicine,
Internal medicine,
Haematology, oncology,
Radiology

© 2015 Bengul Gunalp, Ali Ozan Oner, Semra Ince, Engin Alagoz, Aslı Ayan, Nuri Arslan, published by Association of Radiology and Oncology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 49 (2015): Issue 2 (June 2015)Next article