Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Whole-body PET/MRI to detect bone metastases: comparison of the diagnostic performance of the sequences Cover

Whole-body PET/MRI to detect bone metastases: comparison of the diagnostic performance of the sequences

Radiology and Oncology
Volume 58 (2024): Issue 4 (December 2024)
By: Onur Levent Ulusoy,  Sadık Server,  Murat Yesilova and  Nagihan İnan  
Open Access
|Nov 2024

References

  1. Yu H, Tsai YY, Hoffe SE. Overview of diagnosis and management of metastatic disease to bone. Cancer Control 2012; 19: 84–91. doi: 10.1177/107327481201900202
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. Baüerle T, Semmler W. Imaging response to systemic therapy for bone metastases. Eur Radiol 2009; 19: 2495–507. doi: 10.1007/s00330-009-1443-1
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. Vassiliou V, Andreopoulos D, Frangos S, Tselis N, Giannopoulou E, Lutz S. Bone metastases: assessment of therapeutic response through radiological and nuclear medicine imaging modalities. Clin Oncol 2011; 23: 632–45. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2011.03.010
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. O’Sullivan GJ, Carty FL, Cronin CG. Imaging of bone metastasis: an update. World J Radiol 2015; 7: 202. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v7.i8.202
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E. The detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: 99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, single- and multi-field-of-view SPECT, 18F-fluoride PET, and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 287–97. PMID: 16455635
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. Römer W, Nömayr A, Uder M, Werner Bautz, Torsten Kuwert. SPECT-guided CT for evaluating foci of increased bone metabolism classified as indeterminate on SPECT in cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2006; 47: 1102–6. PMID: 16818944
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. Utsunomiya D, Shiraishi S, Imuta M, Tomiguchi S, Kawanaka K, Morishita S, et al. Added value of SPECT/CT fusion in assessing suspected bone metastasis: comparison with scintigraphy alone and nonfused scintigraphy and CT. Radiology 2006; 238: 264–71. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2373041358
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. Schmidt GP, Schoenberg SO, Schmid R, Stahl R, Tiling R, Becker CR, et al. Screening for bone metastases: whole-body MRI using a 32-channel system versus dual-modality PET-CT. Eur Radiol 2007; 17: 939–49. doi: 10.1007/s00330-006-0361-8
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. Kogan F, Broski SM, Yoon D, Gold GE. Applications of PET-MRI in musculoskeletal disease. J Magn Reson Imaging 2018; 48: 27–47. doi:10.1002/jmri.26183
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. Vanel D, Dromain C, Tardivon A. MRI of bone marrow disorders. Eur Radiol 2000; 10: 224–229. doi: 10.1007/s003300050038
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. Padhani AR, Koh DM, Collins DJ. Whole-body diffusion weighted MR imaging in cancer: current status and research directions. Radiology 2011; 261: 700–18. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11110474
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. Hildebrandt MG, Gerke O, Baun C, Falch K, Hansen JA, Farahani ZA, et al. [181F] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) in suspected recurrent breast cancer: a prospective comparative study of dual-time-point FDG-PET/CT, contrast-enhanced CT, and bone scintigraphy. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34: 1889–97. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.5185
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. Park S, Yoon J-K, Lee SJ, Kang SY, Yim H, An Y-S. Prognostic utility of FDG PET/CT and bone scintigraphy in breast cancer patients with bone-only metastasis. Medicine 2017; 96: e8985. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008985
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. 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. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.2854
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. Krüger S, Buck AK, Mottaghy FM, Hasenkamp E, Pauls S, Schumann C, et al. Detection of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer: 99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, 18F-fluoride PET or 18F-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: 1807. doi: 10.1007/s00259-009-1181-2
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. Hahn S, Heusner T, Kümmel S, Köninger A, Nagarajah J, Müller S, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and bone scintigraphy for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. Acta Radiol 2011; 52: 1009–14. doi: 10.1258/ar.2011.100507
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. 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. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2221-4
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. Huyge V, Garcia C, Vanderstappen A, Alexiou J, Gil T, Flamen P. Progressive osteoblastic bone metastases in breast cancer negative on FDG-PET. Clin Nucl Med 2009; 34: 417–20. doi: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e3181a7d03c
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  19. 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. doi: 10.1007/s00259-005-1842-8
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  20. Liu T, Cheng T, Xu W, Yan WL, Liu J, Yang HL. A metanalysis of 18FDG-PET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Skeletal Radiol 2011; 40: 523–31. doi: 10.1007/s00256-010-0963-8
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  21. Jambor I, Kuisma A, Ramadan S, Huovinen R, Sandell M, Kajander S, et al. Prospective evaluation of planar bone scintigraphy, SPECT, SPECT/CT, 18F-NaF PET/CT and whole body 1.5T MRI, including DWI, for the detection of bone metastases in high risk breast and prostate cancer patients: SKELETA clinical trial. Acta Oncol 2016; 55: 59–67. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2015.1027411
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  22. Ghanem N, Uhl M, Brink I, Schäfer O, Kelly T, Moser E, et al. Diagnostic value of MRI in comparison to scintigraphy, PET, MS-CT and PET/CT for the detection of metastases of bone. Eur J Radiol 2005; 55: 41–55. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.01.016
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  23. Qu X, Huang X, Yan W, Wu L, Dai K. A meta-analysis of 18FDG-PET–CT, 18FDG-PET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 1007–15. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.126
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  24. Eiber M, Takei T, Souvatzoglou M, Fürst S, Gaertner FC, Loeffelbein DJ, et al. Performance of whole-body integrated 18F-FDG PET/MR in comparison to PET/CT for evaluation of malignant bone lesions. J Nucl Med 2014; 55: 191–7. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.113.123646
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  25. Beiderwellen K, Huebner M, Heusch P, Grueneisen J, Ruhlmann V, Nensa F, et al. Whole-body [(1)(8)F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT in the assessment of bone lesions in oncological patients: initial results. Eur Radiol 2014; 24: 2023–30. doi: 10.1007/s00330-014-3229-3
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  26. Löfgren J, Mortensen J, Rasmussen SH, Madsen C, Loft A, Hansen AE, et al. A prospective study comparing 99mTc-hydroxyethylene-diphosphonate planar bone scintigraphy and whole-body SPECT/CT with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and 18F-fluoride PET/MRI for diagnosing bone metastases. J Nucl Med 2017; 58: 1778–85. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.116.189183
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  27. Bruckmann NM, Kirchner IJ, Umutlu L, Fendler WF, Seifert R, Hermann K, et al. Prospective comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/MRI, MRI, CT, and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in the initial staging of primary breast cancer patients. Eur Radiol 2021; 31: 8714–24. doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07956-0
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  28. Catalano OA, Nicolai E, Rosen BR, Luongo A, Catalano M, Iannace C, et al. Comparison of CE FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer 2015; 112: 1452–60. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2015.112
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  29. Sonni I, Minamimoto R, Baratto L, Gambhir SS, Loening AM, Vasanawala SS, et al. Simultaneous PET/MRI in the evaluation of breast and prostate cancer using combined Na[18F] F and [18F]FDG: a focus on skeletal lesions. Mol Imaging Biol 2020; 22: 397–406. doi: 10.1007/s11307-020-01471-2
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  30. Sawicki LM, Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Buchbender C, Nagarajah J, Umutlu L, et al. Evaluation of 18F-FDG PET/MRI, 18F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and CT in whole-body staging of recurrent breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85: 459–65. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.12.010
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  31. Samarin A, Hullner M, Queiroz MA, Stolzmann P, Burger IA, Schulthess G, et al. 18F-FDG-PET/MR increases diagnostic confidence in detection of bone metastases compared with 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Nucl Med Commun 2015; 36: 1165–1173. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000387
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  32. Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Hadaschik BA, Kopp-Schneider A, Eder M, Kopka K, et al. Comparison of hybrid 68Ga-PSMA PET/MRI and 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the evaluation of lymph node and bone metastases of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43: 70–83. doi: 10.1007/s00259-015-3206-3
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  33. Steinborn MM, Heuck AF, Tiling R, Bruegel M, Gauger L, Reiser M. Whole-body bone marrow MRI in patients with metastatic disease to the skeletal system. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1999; 23: 123–9. doi: 10.1097/00004728-199901000-00026
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  34. Zhan Y, Zhang G, Li M, Zhou X. Whole-body MRI vs. PET/CT for the detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol 2021; 11: 633833. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.633833
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  35. Bashir U, Mallia A, Stirling J, Joemon J, MacKewn J, Charles-Edwards G, et al. PET/MRI in oncological imaging: state of the art. Diagnostics 2015; 5: 333–57. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics5030333
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
  36. Araz M, Aras G, Kucuk ON. The role of 18F-NaF PET/CT in metastatic bone disease. J Bone Oncol 2015; 16: 92–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jbo.2015.08.002
    Open DOISearch in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2024-0062 | Journal eISSN: 1581-3207 | Journal ISSN: 1318-2099
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 494 - 500
Submitted on: Jun 2, 2024
Accepted on: Oct 24, 2024
Published on: Nov 28, 2024
Published by: Association of Radiology and Oncology
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
bone metastases,
hybrid imaging,
positron-emission tomography,
magnetic resonance imaging
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Clinical medicine,
Internal medicine,
Haematology, oncology,
Radiology

© 2024 Onur Levent Ulusoy, Sadık Server, Murat Yesilova, Nagihan İnan, published by Association of Radiology and Oncology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 58 (2024): Issue 4 (December 2024)Next article