Back to Search Start Over

Prospective comparative study of 18F-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
Source :
Acta Oncologica; Aug2018, Vol. 57 Issue 8, p1063-1069, 7p, 3 Charts, 1 Graph
Publication Year :
2018

Abstract

Aim: To compare <superscript>18</superscript>F-sodium fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography (NaF PET/ CT) and <superscript>99m</superscript>Tc-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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
0284186X
Volume :
57
Issue :
8
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Acta Oncologica
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
131979501
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1080/0284186X.2018.1438651