Comparison of Choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and Bone Scintigraphy in the Diagnosis of Bone Metastases in Patients with Prostate Cancer: a Meta-analysis

Overview

Journal Skeletal Radiol

Specialties Orthopedics
Radiology

Date 2014 May 21

PMID 24841276

Citations 120

Authors

Guohua Shen

Houfu Deng

Shuang Hu

Zhiyun Jia

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Published data on the diagnosis of bone metastases of prostate cancer are conflicting and heterogeneous. We performed a comprehensive meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of choline-PET/CT, MRI, bone SPECT, and bone scintigraphy (BS) in detecting bone metastases in parents with prostate cancer. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) were calculated both on a per-patient basis and on a per-lesion basis. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were also drawn to obtain the area under curve (AUC) and Q* value. Sixteen articles consisting of 27 studies were included in the analysis. On a per-patient basis, the pooled sensitivities by using choline PET/CT, MRI, and BS were 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-0.96], 0.97 (95% CI: 0.91-0.99), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.83), respectively. The pooled specificities for detection of bone metastases using choline PET/CT, MRI, and BS, were 0.99 (95% CI: 0.93-1.00), 0.95 (95% CI: 0.90-0.97), and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85), respectively. On a per-lesion basis, the pooled sensitivities of choline PET/CT, bone SPECT, and BS were 0.84 (95% CI: 0.81-0.87), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.86-0.93), 0.59 (95% CI: 0.55-0.63), respectively. The pooled specificities were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.89-0.96) for choline PET/CT, 0.85 (95% CI: 0.80-0.90) for bone SPECT, and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.71-0.79) for BS. This meta-analysis indicated that MRI was better than choline PET/CT and BS on a per-patient basis. On a per-lesion analysis, choline PET/CT with the highest DOR and Q* was better than bone SPECT and BS for detecting bone metastases from prostate cancer.

Citing Articles

Conventional radiography for the assessment of focal bone lesions of the appendicular skeleton: fundamental concepts in the modern imaging era.

Matcuk Jr G, Waldman L, Fields B, Colangeli M, Palmas M, Righi A Skeletal Radiol. 2024; .

PMID: 39718620 DOI: 10.1007/s00256-024-04854-6.

Utility of Multiparametric Prostate MRI to Predict Regional or Distant Metastatic Disease Against Conventional Staging Using CT and Bone Scintigraphy or 68Ga-PSMA PET in Intermediate-to-High-Risk Prostate Cancer.

Nguyenhuy M, Chan X, Homewood D, Ogluszko C, Dundee P, Corcoran N Cureus. 2024; 16(11):e73607.

PMID: 39677149 PMC: 11640952. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.73607.

Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET versus [Tc]Tc-MDP bone scan for diagnosing bone metastasis in prostate cancer: a head-to-head comparative meta-analysis.

Wang Y, Qiu Y, Yan X Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1451565.

PMID: 39386742 PMC: 11461218. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1451565.

Present and future of whole-body MRI in metastatic disease and myeloma: how and why you will do it.

Lecouvet F, Chabot C, Taihi L, Kirchgesner T, Triqueneaux P, Malghem J Skeletal Radiol. 2024; 53(9):1815-1831.

PMID: 39007948 PMC: 11303436. DOI: 10.1007/s00256-024-04723-2.

Advancing Prostate Cancer Staging: A Single-Step Approach With Bi-parametric and Whole-Body Diffusion MRI in an African Cohort.

Asafu Adjaye Frimpong G, Aboagye E, Asante E, Appiah K, Owusu-Afriyie O, Asare A Cureus. 2024; 16(5):e59470.

PMID: 38826908 PMC: 11142458. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.59470.

References

McCarthy M, Siew T, Campbell A, Lenzo N, Spry N, Vivian J . ¹⁸F-Fluoromethylcholine (FCH) PET imaging in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: prospective comparison with standard imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010; 38(1):14-22. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-010-1579-x. View

Richter J, Rodriguez M, Rioja J, Penuelas I, Marti-Climent J, Garrastachu P . Dual tracer 11C-choline and FDG-PET in the diagnosis of biochemical prostate cancer relapse after radical treatment. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009; 12(2):210-7. DOI: 10.1007/s11307-009-0243-y. View

Wu Y, Li P, Zhang H, Shi Y, Wu H, Zhang J . Diagnostic value of fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of metastases in non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Int J Cancer. 2012; 132(2):E37-47. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.27779. View

Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A . Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012; 62(1):10-29. DOI: 10.3322/caac.20138. View

Mankoff D . A definition of molecular imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48(6):18N, 21N. View

Picchio M, Spinapolice E, Fallanca F, Crivellaro C, Giovacchini G, Gianolli L . [11C]Choline PET/CT detection of bone metastases in patients with PSA progression after primary treatment for prostate cancer: comparison with bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011; 39(1):13-26. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-011-1920-z. View

Lecouvet F, Simon M, Tombal B, Jamart J, Vande Berg B, Simoni P . Whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) versus axial skeleton MRI (AS-MRI) to detect and measure bone metastases in prostate cancer (PCa). Eur Radiol. 2010; 20(12):2973-82. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1879-3. View

Kosuda S, Kaji T, Yokoyama H, Yokokawa T, Katayama M, Iriye T . Does bone SPECT actually have lower sensitivity for detecting vertebral metastasis than MRI?. J Nucl Med. 1996; 37(6):975-8. View

Liu T, Cheng T, Xu W, Yan W, Liu J, Yang H . A meta-analysis of 18FDG-PET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Skeletal Radiol. 2010; 40(5):523-31. DOI: 10.1007/s00256-010-0963-8. View

10.

Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I . 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(2):287-97. View

11.

Ghanem N, Uhl M, Brink I, Schafer O, Kelly T, Moser E . 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(1):41-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.01.016. View

12.

Love C, Din A, Tomas M, Kalapparambath T, Palestro C . Radionuclide bone imaging: an illustrative review. Radiographics. 2003; 23(2):341-58. DOI: 10.1148/rg.232025103. View

13.

Evangelista L, Guttilla A, Zattoni F, Muzzio P, Zattoni F . Utility of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography for lymph node involvement identification in intermediate- to high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2012; 63(6):1040-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.09.039. View

14.

Venkitaraman R, Cook G, Dearnaley D, Parker C, Khoo V, Eeles R . Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of skeletal metastases in patients with prostate cancer. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2009; 53(3):241-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2009.02070.x. View

15.

Fuccio C, Castellucci P, Schiavina R, Santi I, Allegri V, Pettinato V . Role of 11C-choline PET/CT in the restaging of prostate cancer patients showing a single lesion on bone scintigraphy. Ann Nucl Med. 2010; 24(6):485-92. DOI: 10.1007/s12149-010-0390-x. View

16.

Schoder H, Herrmann K, Gonen M, Hricak H, Eberhard S, Scardino P . 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the detection of disease in patients with prostate-specific antigen relapse after radical prostatectomy. Clin Cancer Res. 2005; 11(13):4761-9. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0249. View

17.

Freedman G, Negendank W, Hudes G, Shaer A, Hanks G . Preliminary results of a bone marrow magnetic resonance imaging protocol for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Urology. 1999; 54(1):118-23. DOI: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00090-4. View

18.

Horiuchi-Suzuki K, Konno A, Ueda M, Fukuda Y, Nishio S, Hashimoto K . Skeletal affinity of Tc(V)-DMS is bone cell mediated and pH dependent. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 31(3):388-98. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-003-1364-1. View

19.

Giovanella L, Castellani M, Suriano S, Ruberto T, Ceriani L, Tagliabue L . Multi-field-of-view SPECT is superior to whole-body scanning for assessing metastatic bone disease in patients with prostate cancer. Tumori. 2011; 97(5):629-33. DOI: 10.1177/030089161109700515. View

20.

Oyama N, Akino H, Suzuki Y, Kanamaru H, Ishida H, Tanase K . FDG PET for evaluating the change of glucose metabolism in prostate cancer after androgen ablation. Nucl Med Commun. 2001; 22(9):963-9. DOI: 10.1097/00006231-200109000-00004. View