The role of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in staging and restaging of patients with osteosarcoma

Natale Quartuccio; Giorgio Treglia; Marco Salsano; Maria Vittoria Mattoli; Barbara Muoio; Arnoldo Piccardo; Egesta Lopci; Angelina Cistaro

doi:10.2478/raon-2013-0017

Abstract

Background. The objective of this study is to systematically review the role of positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) with Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) in patients with osteosarcoma (OS).

Methods. A comprehensive literature search of published studies through October 10th, 2012 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus databases regarding whole-body FDG-PET and FDG-PET/CT in patients with OS was performed.

Results. We identified 13 studies including 289 patients with OS. With regard to the staging and restaging of OS, the diagnostic performance of FDG-PET and PET/CT seem to be high; FDG-PET and PET/CT seem to be superior to bone scintigraphy and conventional imaging methods in detecting bone metastases; conversely, spiral CT seems to be superior to FDG-PET in detecting pulmonary metastases from OS

Conclusions. Metabolic imaging may provide additional information in the evaluation of OS patients. The combination of FDG-PET or FDG-PET/CT with conventional imaging methods seems to be a valuable tool in the staging and restaging of OS and may have a relevant impact on the treatment planning.

References

1. Mirabello L, Troisi RJ, Savage SA. Osteosarcoma incidence and survival rates from 1973 to 2004: data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Cancer 2009; 115: 1531-43.10.1002/cncr.24121281320719197972
Search in Google Scholar
2. Ritter J, Bielack SS. Osteosarcoma. Ann Oncol 2010; 21: 320-5.10.1093/annonc/mdq27620943636
Search in Google Scholar
3. Arndt CA, Crist WM. Common musculoskeletal tumors of childhood and adolescence. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 342-52.10.1056/NEJM19990729341050710423470
Search in Google Scholar
4. Bielack SS, Kempf-Bielack B, Delling G, Exner GU, Flege S, Helmke K, et al. Prognostic factors in high-grade osteosarcoma of the extremities or trunk: an analysis of 1,702 patients treated on neoadjuvant cooperative osteosarcoma study group protocols. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 776-90.10.1200/JCO.2002.20.3.77611821461
Search in Google Scholar
5. Bielack S, Jürgens H, Jundt G, Kevric M, Kühne T, Reichardt P, et al. Osteosarcoma: the COSS experience. Cancer Treat Res 2009; 152: 289-308.10.1007/978-1-4419-0284-9_1520213397
Search in Google Scholar
6. Bacci G, Rocca M, Salone M, Balladelli A, Ferrari S, Palmerini E, et al. High grade osteosarcoma of the extremities with lung metastases at presentation: treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and simultaneous resection of primary and metastatic lesions. J Surg Oncol 2008; 98: 415-20.10.1002/jso.2114018792969
Search in Google Scholar
7. Bielack SS, Carrle D, Hardes J, Schuck A, Paulussen M. Bone tumors in adolescents and young adults. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2008; 9: 67-80.10.1007/s11864-008-0057-118449804
Search in Google Scholar
8. Messerschmitt PJ, Garcia RM, Abdul-Karim FW, Greenfield EM, Getty PJ. Osteosarcoma. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2009; 17: 515-27.10.5435/00124635-200908000-0000519652033
Search in Google Scholar
9. Kager L, Zoubek A, Pötschger U, Kastner U, Flege S, Kempf-Bielack B, et al. Cooperative German-Austrian-Swiss Osteosarcoma Study Group. Primary metastatic osteosarcoma: presentation and outcome of patients treated on neoadjuvant Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group protocols. J ClinOncol 2003; 21: 2011-8.10.1200/JCO.2003.08.13212743156
Search in Google Scholar
10. Posthuma De Boer J, Witlox MA, Kaspers GJ, van Royen BJ. Molecular alterations as target for therapy in metastatic osteosarcoma: a review of literature. Clin Exp Metastasis 2011; 28: 493-503.10.1007/s10585-011-9384-x308105821461590
Search in Google Scholar
11. Kim DH, Kim SY, Lee HJ, Song BS, Kim DH, Cho JB, et al. Assessment of Chemotherapy Response Using FDG-PET in Pediatric Bone Tumors: A Single Institution Experience. Cancer Res Treat 2011; 43: 170-5.10.4143/crt.2011.43.3.170319287822022294
Search in Google Scholar
12. Wuisman P, Enneking WF. Prognosis for patients who have osteosarcoma with skip metastasis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990; 72: 60-8.10.2106/00004623-199072010-00010
Search in Google Scholar
13. Xu J, Shen J, Ding Y, Shen HY, Zeng ZP, Ma RF, et al. The clinical value of combined use of MR imaging and multi-slice spiral CT in limb salvage surgery for orthopaedic oncology patients: initial experience in nine patients. RadiolOncol 2012; 46: 189-97.10.2478/v10019-012-0020-4347294323077457
Search in Google Scholar
14. Chen J, Zhao Y, Li X, Sun P, Wang M, Wang R, et al. Imaging primary prostate cancer with 11C-Choline PET-CT: relation to tumour stage, Gleason score and biomarkers of biologic aggressiveness. Radiol Oncol 2012; 46: 179-88.10.2478/v10019-012-0034-y347294423077456
Search in Google Scholar
15. Kim JS, Jeong YJ, Sohn MH, Jeong HJ, Lim ST, Kim DW, et al. Usefulness of F-18 FDG PET/CT in subcutaneous panniculitis-like T cell lymphoma: disease extent and treatment response evaluation. Radiol Oncol 2012; 46: 279-83.10.2478/v10019-012-0017-z357289123412422
Search in Google Scholar
16. Lakkaraju A, Patel CN, Bradley KM, Scarsbrook AF. PET/CT in primary musculoskeletal tumours: a step forward. Eur Radiol 2010; 20: 2959-72.10.1007/s00330-010-1862-z20577880
Search in Google Scholar
17. Treglia G, Cason E, Fagioli G. Recent applications of nuclear medicine in diagnostics (first part). Ital J Med. 2010; 4: 84-91.10.1016/j.itjm.2010.03.001
Search in Google Scholar
18. Treglia G, Salsano M, Stefanelli A, Mattoli MV, Giordano A, Bonomo L. Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG-PET and PET/CT in patients with Ewing sarcoma family tumours: a systematic review and a meta-analysis. SkeletalRadiol 2012; 41: 249-56.
Search in Google Scholar
19. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Heymer B, Guhlmann A, Hartwig E, Sarkar MR, et al. Grading of tumors and tumorlike lesions of bone: evaluation by FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2000; 41: 1695-701.
Search in Google Scholar
20. Kneisl JS, Patt JC, Johnson JC, Zuger JH. Is PET useful in detecting occult nonpulmonary metastases in pediatric bone sarcomas? Clin Orthop RelatRes 2006; 450: 101-4.
Search in Google Scholar
21. Charest M, Hickeson M, Lisbona R, Novales-Diaz JA, Derbekyan V, Turcotte RE. FDG PET/CT imaging in primary osseous and soft tissue sarcomas: a retrospective review of 212 cases. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: 1944-51.10.1007/s00259-009-1203-019593561
Search in Google Scholar
22. Fuglø HM, Jørgensen SM, Loft A, Hovgaard D, Petersen MM. The diagnostic and prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the initial assessment of highgrade bone and soft-tissue sarcoma. A retrospective study of 89 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39: 1416-24.10.1007/s00259-012-2159-z22699526
Search in Google Scholar
23. Garcia R, Kim EE, Wong FC, Korkmaz M, Wong WH, Yang DJ, et al. Comparison of fluorine-18-FDG PET and technetium-99m-MIBI SPECT in evaluation of musculoskeletal sarcomas. J Nucl Med 1996; 37: 1476-9.
Search in Google Scholar
24. Völker T, Denecke T, Steffen I, Misch D, Schönberger S, Plotkin M, et al. Positron emission tomography for staging of pediatric sarcoma patients: results of a prospective multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 5435-41.10.1200/JCO.2007.12.247318048826
Search in Google Scholar
25. Tateishi U, Yamaguchi U, Seki K, Terauchi T, Arai Y, Kim EE. Bone and softtissue sarcoma: preoperative staging with fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT and conventional imaging. Radiology 2007; 245: 839-47.10.1148/radiol.245306153818024454
Search in Google Scholar
26. Piperkova E, Mikhaeil M, Mousavi A, Libes R, Viejo-Rullan F, Lin H. Impact of PET and CT in PET/CT studies for staging and evaluating treatment response in bone and soft tissue sarcomas. Clin Nucl Med 2009; 34: 146-50.10.1097/RLU.0b013e3181966f9d19352275
Search in Google Scholar
27. London K, Stege C, Cross S, Onikul E, Graf N, Kaspers G, et al. 18F-FDG PET/ CT compared to conventional imaging modalities in pediatric primary bone tumors. Pediatr Radiol 2012; 42: 418-30.10.1007/s00247-011-2278-x22134535
Search in Google Scholar
28. Bandopadhyaya GP, Gupta P, Singh A, Shukla J, Rastogi S, Kumar R, et al. (99m)Tc-DMSA (V) in evaluation of osteosarcoma: comparative studies with (18)F-FDG PET/CT in detection of primary and malignant lesions. ISRNOncol. 2012; 2012: 371830.
Search in Google Scholar
29. Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Sciuk J, Rummeny EJ, Bielack S, Jürgens H, et al. FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with spiral CT. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 479-86.10.1023/A:1011111322376
Search in Google Scholar
30. Iagaru A, Chawla S, Menendez L, Conti PS. 18F-FDG PET and PET/CT for detection of pulmonary metastases from musculoskeletal sarcomas. NuclMed Commun 2006; 27: 795-802.10.1097/01.mnm.0000237986.31597.8616969262
Search in Google Scholar
31. Cistaro A, Lopci E, Gastaldo L, Fania P, Brach Del Prever A, et al. The role of (18) F-FDG PET/CT in the metabolic characterization of lung nodules in pediatric patients with bone sarcoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2012; 59: 1206-10.10.1002/pbc.2424222745027
Search in Google Scholar

The role of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in staging and restaging of patients with osteosarcoma

Abstract

Paradigm

My account