| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 Division of Diagnostic Radiology, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, Nagaizumi,
Shizuoka 411-8777, Japan.
2 Breast Care Unit, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, Shizuoka 411-8777,
Japan.
3 Division of Breast Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, Shizuoka
411-8777, Japan.
4 Division of Medical Oncology, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, Shizuoka
411-8777, Japan.
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of FDG PET and bone SPECT for diagnosing bone metastases in breast cancer.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS. The study was a prospective series of 15 patients with breast cancer who underwent both PET and bone scanning with SPECT. Comparison was performed on a lesion-by-lesion analysis. MDCT, MRI, and the patient's clinical course were used as references.
RESULTS. In the lesion-by-lesion analysis (n = 900), the sensitivity for diagnosing bone metastases was 85% for SPECT and 17% for PET, specificity was 99% for SPECT and 100% for PET, and accuracy was 96% for SPECT and 85% for PET. In the statistical analysis, bone SPECT was significantly superior to FDG PET for its sensitivity (p < 0.0001) and accuracy (p < 0.0001). No statistically significant difference was seen with regard to specificity. When classifying the bone metastases as osteoblastic or osteolytic, bone scanning classified 92% of metastases as osteoblastic and 35% of metastases as osteolytic, whereas PET classified 6% of metastases as osteoblastic and 90% of metastases as osteolytic.
CONCLUSION. Bone SPECT is superior to FDG PET in detecting bone metastases in breast cancer. The sensitivity of osteoblastic lesions is limited with FDG PET. Surveillance of metastatic spread to the skeleton in breast cancer patients based on FDG PET alone is not possible.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  Y. Du, I. Cullum, T. M. Illidge, and P. J. Ell 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., August 10, 2007; 25(23): 3440 - 3447. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. E. Lecouvet, D. Geukens, A. Stainier, F. Jamar, J. Jamart, B. J. d'Othee, P. Therasse, B. V. Berg, and B. Tombal Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Axial Skeleton for Detecting Bone Metastases in Patients With High-Risk Prostate Cancer: Diagnostic and Cost-Effectiveness and Comparison With Current Detection Strategies J. Clin. Oncol., August 1, 2007; 25(22): 3281 - 3287. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. V. Taira, R. J. Herfkens, S. S. Gambhir, and A. Quon Detection of Bone Metastases: Assessment of Integrated FDG PET/CT Imaging Radiology, April 1, 2007; 243(1): 204 - 211. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Even-Sapir, U. Metser, E. Mishani, G. Lievshitz, H. Lerman, and I. Leibovitch 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., February 1, 2006; 47(2): 287 - 297. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. T. Williams, S. Smith, and T. Uematsu FDG PET and SPECT of Bone Metastases in Breast Cancer Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2005; 185(6): 1651 - 1653. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. M. Hall and T. Uematsu Imaging Bone Metastases in Breast Cancer Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2005; 185(4): 1082 - 1083. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
