18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI Perform Equally Well in Cancer: Evidence from Studies on More Than 2,300 Patients

Overview

Journal J Nucl Med

Specialty Nuclear Medicine

Date 2016 Jan 9

PMID 26742709

Citations 62

Authors

Claudio Spick

Ken Herrmann

Johannes Czernin

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

(18)F-FDG PET/CT has become the reference standard in oncologic imaging against which the performance of other imaging modalities is measured. The promise of PET/MRI includes multiparametric imaging to further improve diagnosis and phenotyping of cancer. Rather than focusing on these capabilities, many investigators have examined whether (18)F-FDG PET combined with mostly anatomic MRI improves cancer staging and restaging. After a description of PET/MRI scanner designs and a discussion of technical and operational issues, we review the available literature to determine whether cancer assessments are improved with PET/MRI. The available data show that PET/MRI is feasible and performs as well as PET/CT in most types of cancer. Diagnostic advantages may be achievable in prostate cancer and in bone metastases, whereas disadvantages exist in lung nodule assessments. We conclude that (18)F-FDG PET/MRI and PET/CT provide comparable diagnostic information when MRI is used simply to provide the anatomic framework. Thus, PET/MRI could be used in lieu of PET/CT if this approach becomes economically viable and if reasonable workflows can be established. Future studies should explore the multiparametric potential of MRI.

Citing Articles

Lung imaging methods: indications, strengths and limitations.

Tarnoki D, Karlinger K, Ridge C, Kiss F, Gyorke T, Grabczak E Breathe (Sheff). 2024; 20(3):230127.

PMID: 39360028 PMC: 11444493. DOI: 10.1183/20734735.0127-2023.

Comparison of PET/CT and PET/MRI in central nervous system tumors, a narrative review.

Riahi F, Kiani P, Golabbakhsh A, Khanezarrin M, Abbaspour M, Tabatabaei S Int J Physiol Pathophysiol Pharmacol. 2024; 16(4):89-95.

PMID: 39310737 PMC: 11411248. DOI: 10.62347/UMDS1961.

Hybrid FDG-PET/MRI for Diagnosis and Clinical Management of Patients with Suspected Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Feasibility Pilot Study.

de Jong D, Chehin K, Meijering T, Segbers M, van Driel L, Bruno M Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2024; 58(6):364-376.

PMID: 39308493 PMC: 11415321. DOI: 10.1007/s13139-024-00873-2.

Imaging and Metabolic Diagnostic Methods in the Stage Assessment of Rectal Cancer.

Maksim R, Buczynska A, Sidorkiewicz I, Kretowski A, Sierko E Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(14).

PMID: 39061192 PMC: 11275086. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16142553.

Case report: diagnosis and treatment of advanced high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma aided by Ga-FAPI PET/MR scan.

Zhu M, Sun S, Huang L, Chen M, Cai J, Wang Z Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2024; 14(1):72-77.

PMID: 38500744 PMC: 10944375.

References

Bailey D, Antoch G, Bartenstein P, Barthel H, Beer A, Bisdas S . Combined PET/MR: The Real Work Has Just Started. Summary Report of the Third International Workshop on PET/MR Imaging; February 17-21, 2014, Tübingen, Germany. Mol Imaging Biol. 2015; 17(3):297-312. PMC: 4422837. DOI: 10.1007/s11307-014-0818-0. View

Werner R, Bluemel C, Allen-Auerbach M, Higuchi T, Herrmann K . 68Gallium- and 90Yttrium-/ 177Lutetium: "theranostic twins" for diagnosis and treatment of NETs. Ann Nucl Med. 2014; 29(1):1-7. PMC: 4306729. DOI: 10.1007/s12149-014-0898-6. View

Abu-Rustum N, Yashar C, Arend R, Barber E, Bradley K, Brooks R . Uterine Neoplasms, Version 1.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2023; 21(2):181-209. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2023.0006. View

Queiroz M, Hullner M, Kuhn F, Huber G, Meerwein C, Kollias S . PET/MRI and PET/CT in follow-up of head and neck cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014; 41(6):1066-75. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-014-2707-9. View

Heacock L, Weissbrot J, Raad R, Campbell N, Friedman K, Ponzo F . PET/MRI for the evaluation of patients with lymphoma: initial observations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015; 204(4):842-8. PMC: 4465553. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.14.13181. View

Rauscher I, Eiber M, Furst S, Souvatzoglou M, Nekolla S, Ziegler S . PET/MR imaging in the detection and characterization of pulmonary lesions: technical and diagnostic evaluation in comparison to PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2014; 55(5):724-9. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.113.129247. View

Cheson B . Staging and response assessment in lymphomas: the new Lugano classification. Chin Clin Oncol. 2015; 4(1):5. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2304-3865.2014.11.03. View

Pace L, Nicolai E, Luongo A, Aiello M, Catalano O, Soricelli A . Comparison of whole-body PET/CT and PET/MRI in breast cancer patients: lesion detection and quantitation of 18F-deoxyglucose uptake in lesions and in normal organ tissues. Eur J Radiol. 2013; 83(2):289-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.11.002. View

Mohler J, Bahnson R, Boston B, Busby J, DAmico A, Eastham J . NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: prostate cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010; 8(2):162-200. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2010.0012. View

10.

Stolzmann P, Veit-Haibach P, Chuck N, Rossi C, Frauenfelder T, Alkadhi H . Detection rate, location, and size of pulmonary nodules in trimodality PET/CT-MR: comparison of low-dose CT and Dixon-based MR imaging. Invest Radiol. 2012; 48(5):241-6. DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31826f2de9. View

11.

Kubiessa K, Purz S, Gawlitza M, Kuhn A, Fuchs J, Steinhoff K . Initial clinical results of simultaneous 18F-FDG PET/MRI in comparison to 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013; 41(4):639-48. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-013-2633-2. View

12.

Shah D, Sachs R, Wilson D . Radiation-induced cancer: a modern view. Br J Radiol. 2012; 85(1020):e1166-73. PMC: 3611719. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/25026140. View

13.

Covello M, Cavaliere C, Aiello M, Cianelli M, Mesolella M, Iorio B . Simultaneous PET/MR head-neck cancer imaging: Preliminary clinical experience and multiparametric evaluation. Eur J Radiol. 2015; 84(7):1269-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.04.010. View

14.

Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt B, Heubner M, Suntharalingam S, Milk I, Kinner S . Implementation of FAST-PET/MRI for whole-body staging of female patients with recurrent pelvic malignancies: A comparison to PET/CT. Eur J Radiol. 2015; 84(11):2097-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.08.010. View

15.

Wiesmuller M, Quick H, Navalpakkam B, Lell M, Uder M, Ritt P . Comparison of lesion detection and quantitation of tracer uptake between PET from a simultaneously acquiring whole-body PET/MR hybrid scanner and PET from PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 40(1):12-21. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-012-2249-y. View

16.

Afshar-Oromieh A, Wolf M, Kratochwil C, Giesel F, Combs S, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A . Comparison of ⁶⁸Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT and PET/MRI hybrid systems in patients with cranial meningioma: Initial results. Neuro Oncol. 2014; 17(2):312-9. PMC: 4288516. DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/nou131. View

17.

Clark O, Benson 3rd A, Berlin J, Choti M, Doherty G, Engstrom P . NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: neuroendocrine tumors. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2009; 7(7):712-47. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2009.0050. View

18.

Varghese Jr T, Hofstetter W, Rizk N, Low D, Darling G, Watson T . The society of thoracic surgeons guidelines on the diagnosis and staging of patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013; 96(1):346-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.02.069. View

19.

Zelenetz A, Abramson J, Advani R, Andreadis C, Byrd J, Czuczman M . NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010; 8(3):288-334. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2010.0021. View

20.

Appenzeller P, Mader C, Huellner M, Schmidt D, Schmid D, Boss A . PET/CT versus body coil PET/MRI: how low can you go?. Insights Imaging. 2013; 4(4):481-90. PMC: 3731468. DOI: 10.1007/s13244-013-0247-7. View