Cargando…

Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in treatments, metastatic breast cancer remains difficult to cure. Bones constitute the most common site of first-time recurrence, occurring in 40–75% of cases. Therefore, evaluation for possible osseous metastases is crucial. Technetium 99 ((99)Tc) bone scintigraphy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Catalano, O A, Nicolai, E, Rosen, B R, Luongo, A, Catalano, M, Iannace, C, Guimaraes, A, Vangel, M G, Mahmood, U, Soricelli, A, Salvatore, M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25871331
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.112
_version_ 1782374498037661696
author Catalano, O A
Nicolai, E
Rosen, B R
Luongo, A
Catalano, M
Iannace, C
Guimaraes, A
Vangel, M G
Mahmood, U
Soricelli, A
Salvatore, M
author_facet Catalano, O A
Nicolai, E
Rosen, B R
Luongo, A
Catalano, M
Iannace, C
Guimaraes, A
Vangel, M G
Mahmood, U
Soricelli, A
Salvatore, M
author_sort Catalano, O A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in treatments, metastatic breast cancer remains difficult to cure. Bones constitute the most common site of first-time recurrence, occurring in 40–75% of cases. Therefore, evaluation for possible osseous metastases is crucial. Technetium 99 ((99)Tc) bone scintigraphy and fluorodexossyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (PET-CT) are the most commonly used techniques to assess osseous metastasis. PET magnetic resonance (PET-MR) imaging is an innovative technique still under investigation. We compared the capability of PET-MR to that of same-day PET-CT to assess osseous metastases in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: One hundred and nine patients with breast cancer, who underwent same-day contrast enhanced (CE)-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR, were evaluated. CE-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR studies were interpreted by consensus by a radiologist and a nuclear medicine physician. Correlations with prior imaging and follow-up studies were used as the reference standard. Binomial confidence intervals and a χ(2) test were used for categorical data, and paired t-test was used for the SUVmax data; a non-informative prior Bayesian approach was used to estimate and compare the specificities. RESULTS: Osseous metastases affected 25 out 109 patients. Metastases were demonstrated by CE-PET-CT in 22 out of 25 patients (88%±7%), and by CE-PET-MR in 25 out of 25 patients (100%). CE-PET-CT revealed 90 osseous metastases and CE-PET-MR revealed 141 osseous metastases (P<0.001). The estimated sensitivity of CE-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR were 0.8519 and 0.9630, respectively. The estimated specificity for CE-FDG-PET-MR was 0.9884. The specificity of CE-PET-CT cannot be determined from patient-level data, because CE-PET-CT yielded a false-positive lesion in a patient who also had other, true metastases. CONCLUSIONS: CE-PET-MR detected a higher number of osseous metastases than did same-day CE-PET-CT, and was positive for 12% of the patients deemed osseous metastasis-negative on the basis of CE-PET-CT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4453670
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44536702016-04-28 Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients Catalano, O A Nicolai, E Rosen, B R Luongo, A Catalano, M Iannace, C Guimaraes, A Vangel, M G Mahmood, U Soricelli, A Salvatore, M Br J Cancer Clinical Study BACKGROUND: Despite improvements in treatments, metastatic breast cancer remains difficult to cure. Bones constitute the most common site of first-time recurrence, occurring in 40–75% of cases. Therefore, evaluation for possible osseous metastases is crucial. Technetium 99 ((99)Tc) bone scintigraphy and fluorodexossyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (PET-CT) are the most commonly used techniques to assess osseous metastasis. PET magnetic resonance (PET-MR) imaging is an innovative technique still under investigation. We compared the capability of PET-MR to that of same-day PET-CT to assess osseous metastases in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: One hundred and nine patients with breast cancer, who underwent same-day contrast enhanced (CE)-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR, were evaluated. CE-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR studies were interpreted by consensus by a radiologist and a nuclear medicine physician. Correlations with prior imaging and follow-up studies were used as the reference standard. Binomial confidence intervals and a χ(2) test were used for categorical data, and paired t-test was used for the SUVmax data; a non-informative prior Bayesian approach was used to estimate and compare the specificities. RESULTS: Osseous metastases affected 25 out 109 patients. Metastases were demonstrated by CE-PET-CT in 22 out of 25 patients (88%±7%), and by CE-PET-MR in 25 out of 25 patients (100%). CE-PET-CT revealed 90 osseous metastases and CE-PET-MR revealed 141 osseous metastases (P<0.001). The estimated sensitivity of CE-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR were 0.8519 and 0.9630, respectively. The estimated specificity for CE-FDG-PET-MR was 0.9884. The specificity of CE-PET-CT cannot be determined from patient-level data, because CE-PET-CT yielded a false-positive lesion in a patient who also had other, true metastases. CONCLUSIONS: CE-PET-MR detected a higher number of osseous metastases than did same-day CE-PET-CT, and was positive for 12% of the patients deemed osseous metastasis-negative on the basis of CE-PET-CT. Nature Publishing Group 2015-04-28 2015-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC4453670/ /pubmed/25871331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.112 Text en Copyright © 2015 Cancer Research UK http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Catalano, O A
Nicolai, E
Rosen, B R
Luongo, A
Catalano, M
Iannace, C
Guimaraes, A
Vangel, M G
Mahmood, U
Soricelli, A
Salvatore, M
Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients
title Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients
title_full Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients
title_fullStr Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients
title_short Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients
title_sort comparison of ce-fdg-pet/ct with ce-fdg-pet/mr in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453670/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25871331
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.112
work_keys_str_mv AT catalanooa comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT nicolaie comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT rosenbr comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT luongoa comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT catalanom comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT iannacec comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT guimaraesa comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT vangelmg comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT mahmoodu comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT soricellia comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients
AT salvatorem comparisonofcefdgpetctwithcefdgpetmrintheevaluationofosseousmetastasesinbreastcancerpatients