We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Prospective comparative study of <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride PET/CT and planar bone scintigraphy for treatment response assessment of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer.
- Authors
Fonager, Randi Fuglsang; Zacho, Helle Damgaard; Langkilde, Niels Christian; Fledelius, Joan; Ejlersen, June Anita; Hendel, Helle Westergreen; Haarmark, Christian; Moe, Mette; Mortensen, Jesper Carl; Jochumsen, Mads Ryø; Petersen, Lars Jelstrup
- Abstract
Aim: To compare 18F-sodium fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography (NaF PET/ CT) and 99mTc-labelled diphosphonate bone scan (BS) for the monitoring of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer undergoing anti-cancer treatment. Material and methods: Data from 64 patients with prostate cancer were included. The patients received androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), next-generation hormonal therapy (NGH) or chemotherapy. The patients had a baseline scan and 1-3 subsequent scans during six months of treatment. Images were evaluated by experienced nuclear medicine physicians and classified for progressive disease (PD) or non-PD according to the Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 (PCWG-2) criteria. The patients were also classified as having PD/non-PD according to the clinical and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) responses. Results: There was no difference between NaF PET/CT and BS in the detection of PD and non-PD during treatment (McNemar’s test, p = .18). The agreement between BS and NaF PET/CT for PD/non-PD was moderate (Cohen’s kappa 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.79). Crude agreement between BS and NaF PET/CT for the assessment of PD/non-PD was 86% (89% for ADT, n = 28; 88% for NGH, n = 16, and 80% for chemotherapy, n = 20). In most discordant cases, BS found PD when NaF PET/CT did not, or BS detected PD on an earlier scan than NaF PET/CT. Biochemical progression (27%) occurred more frequently than progression on functional imaging (BS, 22% and NaF PET/CT, 14%). Clinical progression was rare (11%), and almost exclusively seen in patients receiving chemotherapy. Conclusion: There was no difference between NaF PET/CT and BS in the detection of PD and non-PD; however, BS seemingly detects PD by the PCWG-2 criteria earlier than NaF-PET, which might be explained by the fact that NaF-PET is more sensitive at the baseline scan.
- Subjects
BONE metastasis; CANCER chemotherapy; COMPARATIVE studies; CONFIDENCE intervals; DEOXY sugars; DIPHOSPHONATES; LONGITUDINAL method; PROSTATE tumors; RADIONUCLIDE imaging; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SODIUM compounds; POSITRON emission tomography; DATA analysis; DISEASE progression; DESCRIPTIVE statistics
- Publication
Acta Oncologica, 2018, Vol 57, Issue 8, p1063
- ISSN
0284-186X
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1080/0284186X.2018.1438651