Evaluation of Radiographic and Metabolic Changes in Bone Metastases in Response to Systemic Therapy with (18)FDG-PET/CT

Overview

Journal Radiol Oncol

Publisher Sciendo

Specialties Oncology
Radiology

Date 2015 Jun 2

PMID 26029021

Citations 3

Authors

Bengul Gunalp

Ali Ozan Oner

Semra Ince

Engin Alagoz

Asli Ayan

Nuri Arslan

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to retrospectively evaluate radiographic and metabolic changes in bone metastases in response to systemic therapy with (18)FDG-PET/CT and determine their roles on the evaluation of therapy response.

Patients And Methods: We retrospectively evaluated radiographic and metabolic characteristics of bone metastases in 30 patients who were referred for the evaluation of response to systemic therapy with (18)FDG-PET/CT. All patients underwent integrated (18)FDG-PET/CT before and after treatment.

Results: The baseline radiographic patterns of the target lesions in responders group were lytic, sclerotic, mixed and CT negative; after treatment the radiographic patterns of all target lesions changed to a sclerotic pattern and attenuation increased (p = 0.012) and metabolic activity decreased (p = 0.012). A correlation was found between decreasing metabolic activity and increasing attenuation of the target lesions (r = -0.55) (p = 0.026). However, in nonresponders group, the baseline radiologic patterns of the target lesions were lytic, blastic, mixed and CT negative; after treatment all lytic target lesions remained the same and one CT negative lesion turned to lytic pattern and the attenuation of the target lesions decreased (p ± 0.12) and metabolic activity increased (p = 0.012). A correlation was found between increasing metabolic activity and decreasing attenuation (r = -0.65) (p = 0.032). An exception of this rule was seen in baseline blastic metastases which progressed with increasing in size, metabolic activity and attenuation.

Conclusions: This study shows that the metabolic activity of lesions is a more reliable parameter than the radiographic patterns for the evaluation of therapy response.

Citing Articles

FDG-PET/CT Versus Contrast-Enhanced CT for Response Evaluation in Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Helland F, Hallin Henriksen M, Gerke O, Vogsen M, Hoilund-Carlsen P, Hildebrandt M Diagnostics (Basel). 2019; 9(3).

PMID: 31461923 PMC: 6787711. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics9030106.

PET/CT-Based Response Evaluation in Cancer-a Systematic Review of Design Issues.

Gerke O, Ehlers K, Motschall E, Hoilund-Carlsen P, Vach W Mol Imaging Biol. 2019; 22(1):33-46.

PMID: 31016638 DOI: 10.1007/s11307-019-01351-4.

Emerging and Established Models of Bone Metastasis.

Jinnah A, Zacks B, Gwam C, Kerr B Cancers (Basel). 2018; 10(6).

PMID: 29865211 PMC: 6024970. DOI: 10.3390/cancers10060176.

References

Yang H, Liu T, Wang X, Xu Y, Deng S . Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing ¹⁸FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. Eur Radiol. 2011; 21(12):2604-17. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-011-2221-4. View

Hamaoka T, Madewell J, Podoloff D, Hortobagyi G, Ueno N . Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22(14):2942-53. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.08.181. View

Evangelista L, Panunzio A, Polverosi R, Ferretti A, Chondrogiannis S, Pomerri F . Early bone marrow metastasis detection: the additional value of FDG-PET/CT vs. CT imaging. Biomed Pharmacother. 2012; 66(6):448-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2012.06.004. View

Wahl R, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge M . From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50 Suppl 1:122S-50S. PMC: 2755245. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.057307. View

Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T, Yamada K, Ushijima Y, Taniike K . Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005; 32(11):1253-8. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-005-1842-8. View

Du Y, Cullum I, Illidge T, Ell P . 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(23):3440-7. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.2854. View

Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, Aramaki T, Morimoto N, Endo M . Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 184(4):1266-73. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.184.4.01841266. View

Ben-Haim S, Israel O . Breast cancer: role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med. 2009; 39(6):408-15. DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2009.05.002. View

An Y, Yoon J, Lee M, Joh C, Yoon S . False negative F-18 FDG PET/CT in nonsmall cell lung cancer bone metastases. Clin Nucl Med. 2005; 30(3):203-4. DOI: 10.1097/00003072-200503000-00017. View

10.

Juweid M, Cheson B . Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med. 2006; 354(5):496-507. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra050276. View

11.

Eisenhauer E, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz L, Sargent D, Ford R . New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2008; 45(2):228-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026. View

12.

Lipton A . Pathophysiology of bone metastases: how this knowledge may lead to therapeutic intervention. J Support Oncol. 2004; 2(3):205-13. View

13.

Abe K, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Koga H, Baba S, Hayashi K . Comparison of 18FDG-PET with 99mTc-HMDP scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2005; 19(7):573-9. DOI: 10.1007/BF02985050. View

14.

Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, Yeung H, Cristofanilli M, Macapinlac H . Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT. Radiology. 2008; 247(1):189-96. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2471070567. View

15.

Schirrmeister H . Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by positron emission tomography. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007; 45(4):669-76, vi. DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2007.05.007. View

16.

Cook G, Houston S, Rubens R, Maisey M, Fogelman I . Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16(10):3375-9. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.10.3375. View

17.

von Schulthess G, Steinert H, Hany T . Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions. Radiology. 2006; 238(2):405-22. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2382041977. View

18.

Bellamy E, Nicholas D, Ward M, Coombes R, Powles T, Husband J . Comparison of computed tomography and conventional radiology in the assessment of treatment response of lytic bony metastases in patients with carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol. 1987; 38(4):351-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0009-9260(87)80207-6. View

19.

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. 2011; 81(5):1007-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.126. View

20.

Basu S, Torigian D, Alavi A . Evolving concept of imaging bone marrow metastasis in the twenty-first century: critical role of FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007; 35(3):465-71. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-007-0593-0. View