Cargando…

Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis?

OBJECTIVES: Osseous metastases (OM) in endometrial cancer (EMCA) are thought to be rare. This study aimed to address the gap in present knowledge by defining the rate of OM in endometrial cancer (EMCA) as stratified by histology and ascertaining the best diagnostic modality for detection. METHODS: 4...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hong, Linda, Cristiano, Laurin, Peters, Eric, Ioffe, Yevgeniya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7820478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33521220
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gore.2021.100698
_version_ 1783639223012687872
author Hong, Linda
Cristiano, Laurin
Peters, Eric
Ioffe, Yevgeniya
author_facet Hong, Linda
Cristiano, Laurin
Peters, Eric
Ioffe, Yevgeniya
author_sort Hong, Linda
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Osseous metastases (OM) in endometrial cancer (EMCA) are thought to be rare. This study aimed to address the gap in present knowledge by defining the rate of OM in endometrial cancer (EMCA) as stratified by histology and ascertaining the best diagnostic modality for detection. METHODS: 435 consecutive cases of EMCA evaluated in tertiary care setting were reviewed. Clinico-pathologic data were abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS: 18/403 patients were found to have OM (4.6%). Majority were detected by PET/CT (13/18 (72%)), with conventional CT scans missing the diagnoses otherwise made by PET/CT scans in 2/9 patients. Patients with type II EMCA were at higher risk of developing OM compared with patients with type I EMCA; 2/234 patients with type I EMCA (0.85%) developed OM, as compared to 16/167 patients with type II EMCA (9.58%), OR = 12.3. Patients with serous histology had significantly higher odds of developing OM when compared to patients with non-serous histologies (OR 4, p = 0.001, 95% CI 1.54 to 10.76). Kaplan Myer survival function and log-rank analysis showed that the presence of OM was a significant negative prognosticator of survival, with median overall survival (mOS) of 16 months in OM patients vs. mOS undefined in non-OM patients (p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Incidence of detected OM was clinically significant, with most cases identified by PET/CT scans. Patients with type II EMCA, and in particular serous histology, were at a significantly higher risk of developing OM. OM when present, is an indicator of aggressive cancer biology and poor prognosis. Further studies are needed to ascertain the mechanism of predisposition to OM formation in serous EMCA and to confirm PET/CT as modality of choice for detection of OM.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7820478
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78204782021-01-29 Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis? Hong, Linda Cristiano, Laurin Peters, Eric Ioffe, Yevgeniya Gynecol Oncol Rep Research Report OBJECTIVES: Osseous metastases (OM) in endometrial cancer (EMCA) are thought to be rare. This study aimed to address the gap in present knowledge by defining the rate of OM in endometrial cancer (EMCA) as stratified by histology and ascertaining the best diagnostic modality for detection. METHODS: 435 consecutive cases of EMCA evaluated in tertiary care setting were reviewed. Clinico-pathologic data were abstracted and analyzed. RESULTS: 18/403 patients were found to have OM (4.6%). Majority were detected by PET/CT (13/18 (72%)), with conventional CT scans missing the diagnoses otherwise made by PET/CT scans in 2/9 patients. Patients with type II EMCA were at higher risk of developing OM compared with patients with type I EMCA; 2/234 patients with type I EMCA (0.85%) developed OM, as compared to 16/167 patients with type II EMCA (9.58%), OR = 12.3. Patients with serous histology had significantly higher odds of developing OM when compared to patients with non-serous histologies (OR 4, p = 0.001, 95% CI 1.54 to 10.76). Kaplan Myer survival function and log-rank analysis showed that the presence of OM was a significant negative prognosticator of survival, with median overall survival (mOS) of 16 months in OM patients vs. mOS undefined in non-OM patients (p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Incidence of detected OM was clinically significant, with most cases identified by PET/CT scans. Patients with type II EMCA, and in particular serous histology, were at a significantly higher risk of developing OM. OM when present, is an indicator of aggressive cancer biology and poor prognosis. Further studies are needed to ascertain the mechanism of predisposition to OM formation in serous EMCA and to confirm PET/CT as modality of choice for detection of OM. Elsevier 2021-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC7820478/ /pubmed/33521220 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gore.2021.100698 Text en © 2021 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Report
Hong, Linda
Cristiano, Laurin
Peters, Eric
Ioffe, Yevgeniya
Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis?
title Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis?
title_full Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis?
title_fullStr Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis?
title_full_unstemmed Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis?
title_short Detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: How common are they and should PET/CT be the standard for diagnosis?
title_sort detection of bone metastases in uterine cancer: how common are they and should pet/ct be the standard for diagnosis?
topic Research Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7820478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33521220
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gore.2021.100698
work_keys_str_mv AT honglinda detectionofbonemetastasesinuterinecancerhowcommonaretheyandshouldpetctbethestandardfordiagnosis
AT cristianolaurin detectionofbonemetastasesinuterinecancerhowcommonaretheyandshouldpetctbethestandardfordiagnosis
AT peterseric detectionofbonemetastasesinuterinecancerhowcommonaretheyandshouldpetctbethestandardfordiagnosis
AT ioffeyevgeniya detectionofbonemetastasesinuterinecancerhowcommonaretheyandshouldpetctbethestandardfordiagnosis