Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleClinical Investigations

Semiquantitative Analysis of the Biodistribution of the Combined 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG Administration for PET/CT Imaging

Ryogo Minamimoto, Camila Mosci, Mehran Jamali, Amir Barkhodari, Frezghi Habte, Tatianie Jackson, Erik Mittra, Sanjiv Sam Gambhir and Andrei Iagaru
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2015, 56 (5) 688-694; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.153767
Ryogo Minamimoto
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
2Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Camila Mosci
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mehran Jamali
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
2Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amir Barkhodari
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frezghi Habte
2Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tatianie Jackson
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Erik Mittra
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sanjiv Sam Gambhir
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
2Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrei Iagaru
1Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    A 65-y-old man with metastatic prostate cancer. (A) 18F-NaF. (B) 18F-FDG. (C) 18F−/18F-FDG. SUVmax or SUVmean of left atrium, liver, mediastinal lymph node, right rib lesion, left iliac lymph node, and left iliac bone lesion were shown for 18F-NaF, 18F-FDG, and estimated 18F−/18F-FDG, respectively.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Details of 3 Types of PET Scans

    Parameter18F−/18F-FDG18F-FDG18F-NaF
    Injection dose (MBq)18F−/18F-FDG: 625.1 ± 85.8478.2 ± 85.0248.7 ± 84.0
    18F-FDG: 426.9 ± 82.7
    18F-NaF: 199.7 ± 35.5
    Time from injection to imaging (min)76.6 ± 13.075.5 ± 13.875.2 ± 17.7
    The difference in time of starting PET/CT with 18F−/18F-FDG PET/CT (min)—1.1 ± 13.01.3 ± 15.0
    Time interval of PET/CT with 18F−/18F-FDG PET/CT (d)—4.1 ± 4.74.1 ± 4.4
    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Radiopharmaceutical Uptake (SUVmean) for Studied Organs, Based on Time from Injection to Imaging

    Time from injection to imaging (min)
    18F−/18F-FDG18F-FDG18F-NaF
    Organ52–60 (n = 6)60–90 (n = 32)90–104 (n = 11)43–60 (n = 8)60–90 (n = 35)90–111 (n = 6)39–60 (n = 10)60–90 (n = 29)90–117 (n = 10)
    Brain cortex (frontal lobe)10.4 ± 2.49.7 ± 2.410.4 ± 2.510.0 ± 2.010.2 ± 2.511.2 ± 2.50.2 ± 0.10.3 ± 0.10.3 ± 0.1
    Cerebellum8.5 ± 1.88.2 ± 1.98.6 ± 2.08.2 ± 1.98.7 ± 1.99.2 ± 1.20.2 ± 0.10.2 ± 0.10.2 ± 0.1
    Parotid grand2.1 ± 0.91.9 ± 0.71.5 ± 0.41.6 ± 0.92.1 ± 1.11.4 ± 0.60.6 ± 0.20.5 ± 0.10.4 ± 0.1
    Lung0.7 ± 0.20.6 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.20.4 ± 0.20.5 ± 0.10.6 ± 0.10.3 ± 0.10.4 ± 0.20.4 ± 0.1
    Myocardium4.3 ± 2.44.8 ± 4.14.0 ± 4.03.7 ± 2.64.3 ± 3.97.7 ± 7.10.6 ± 0.30.7 ± 0.20.6 ± 0.2
    Left atrium (background)2.7 ± 0.72.3 ± 0.62.2 ± 0.61.8 ± 0.51.8 ± 0.41.9 ± 0.31.1 ± 0.41.2 ± 0.40.9 ± 0.3
    Liver2.6 ± 0.62.3 ± 0.52.5 ± 0.62.0 ± 0.52.2 ± 0.42.2 ± 0.30.4 ± 0.10.5 ± 0.20.4 ± 0.1
    Spleen2.2 ± 0.41.8 ± 0.62.3 ± 1.11.8 ± 0.61.7 ± 0.51.9 ± 0.30.6 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.20.5 ± 0.2
    Pancreas1.9 ± 0.31.7 ± 0.51.5 ± 0.61.4 ± 0.31.5 ± 0.41.2 ± 0.40.6 ± 0.20.6 ± 0.20.6 ± 0.2
    Kidney3.1 ± 0.82.7 ± 0.82.9 ± 1.12.4 ± 0.62.4 ± 0.62.0 ± 0.51.2 ± 0.51.7 ± 0.81.3 ± 0.5
    Cecum1.6 ± 0.41.7 ± 1.41.8 ± 1.80.9 ± 0.31.8 ± 2.01.0 ± 0.50.6 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.40.5 ± 0.1
    Trapezius muscle1.0 ± 0.31.0 ± 0.31.0 ± 0.30.6 ± 0.10.6 ± 0.10.7 ± 0.10.7 ± 0.20.8 ± 0.20.8 ± 0.2
    Gluteus maximus muscle1.0 ± 0.40.9 ± 0.31.1 ± 0.40.6 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.20.6 ± 0.10.7 ± 0.30.8 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.2
    Fat tissue0.3 ± 0.10.4 ± 0.20.4 ± 0.20.3 ± 0.10.3 ± 0.20.2 ± 0.10.2 ± 0.10.3 ± 0.10.2 ± 0.1
    Cervical vertebrae4.9 ± 2.64.5 ± 1.55.0 ± 2.71.3 ± 0.61.3 ± 0.31.7 ± 0.57.2 ± 3.16.9 ± 2.27.3 ± 2.5
    Thoracic vertebrae6.0 ± 2.95.0 ± 1.65.3 ± 2.51.8 ± 0.71.7 ± 0.61.6 ± 0.57.0 ± 2.57.6 ± 2.17.2 ± 2.0
    Lumbar vertebrae5.6 ± 2.44.8 ± 1.94.9 ± 3.01.5 ± 0.41.7 ± 0.61.5 ± 0.76.7 ± 1.67.1 ± 2.46.3 ± 2.4
    Sacrum4.9 ± 2.53.8 ± 1.54.2 ± 3.01.1 ± 0.31.2 ± 0.51.6 ± 0.15.8 ± 2.25.7 ± 2.35.3 ± 2.8
    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    SUVmean Measurements from PET Scans

    SUVmeanComparison of 18F−/18F-FDG and 18F-FDG
    Organ18F−/18F-FDG18F-FDG18F-NaFPCorrelation (r)
    Brain cortex (frontal lobe)10.0 ± 2.410.3 ± 2.40.2 ± 0.10.320.62
    Cerebellum8.4 ± 1.98.7 ± 1.80.2 ± 0.10.510.49
    Parotid grand1.8 ± 0.71.9 ± 1.00.5 ± 0.20.770.75
    Lung0.6 ± 0.20.5 ± 0.10.4 ± 0.1<0.0010.76
    Myocardium4.5 ± 3.84.6 ± 4.30.7 ± 0.20.940.69
    Left atrium (background)2.3 ± 0.61.8 ± 0.41.1 ± 0.4<0.0010.71
    Liver2.4 ± 0.52.2 ± 0.40.5 ± 0.2<0.0070.60
    Spleen2.0 ± 0.71.7 ± 0.50.6 ± 0.2<0.0010.60
    Pancreas1.7 ± 0.51.5 ± 0.40.6 ± 0.20.0010.46
    Kidney2.8 ± 0.82.4 ± 0.61.5 ± 0.70.0030.28
    Cecum1.7 ± 1.41.6 ± 1.70.7 ± 0.30.300.75
    Trapezius muscle1.0 ± 0.30.6 ± 0.10.8 ± 0.2<0.0010.50
    Gluteus maximus muscle1.0 ± 0.30.7 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.2<0.0010.68
    Fat tissue0.4 ± 0.20.3 ± 0.20.2 ± 0.1<0.0010.85
    Cervical vertebrae4.7 ± 1.91.4 ± 0.47.0 ± 2.4<0.0010.51
    Thoracic vertebrae5.2 ± 2.01.7 ± 0.67.4 ± 2.1<0.0010.65
    Lumbar vertebrae4.9 ± 2.21.6 ± 0.66.8 ± 2.2<0.0010.71
    Sacrum4.0 ± 2.01.3 ± 0.55.7 ± 2.3<0.0010.66
    • View popup
    TABLE 4

    SUVmean of 18F−/18F-FDG in Studied Organ and Differences from Estimated 18F−/18F-FDG Values

    Comparison of 18F−/18F-FDG and estimated 18F−/18F-FDG
    Organ18F−/18F-FDGEstimated 18F−/18F-FDGPCorrelation (r)
    Brain cortex (frontal lobe)10.0 ± 2.410.4 ± 2.40.170.62
    Cerebellum8.4 ± 1.98.8 ± 1.80.260.49
    Parotid grand1.8 ± 0.72.2 ± 1.1<0.0030.77
    Lung0.6 ± 0.20.7 ± 0.20.240.85
    Myocardium4.5 ± 3.85.0 ± 4.30.280.69
    Left atrium (background)2.3 ± 0.62.4 ± 0.60.160.80
    Liver2.4 ± 0.52.4 ± 0.50.240.64
    Spleen2.0 ± 0.72.0 ± 0.50.580.61
    Pancreas1.7 ± 0.51.8 ± 0.50.260.54
    Kidney2.8 ± 0.83.1 ± 0.8<0.020.44
    Cecum1.7 ± 1.41.9 ± 1.90.580.76
    Trapezius muscle1.0 ± 0.31.0 ± 0.20.390.73
    Gluteus maximus muscle1.0 ± 0.31.0 ± 0.30.520.75
    Fat tissue0.4 ± 0.20.4 ± 0.20.660.87
    Cervical vertebrae4.7 ± 1.94.8 ± 1.70.190.77
    Thoracic vertebrae5.2 ± 2.05.3 ± 1.80.310.85
    Lumbar vertebrae4.9 ± 2.25.0 ± 1.90.470.85
    Sacrum4.0 ± 2.03.9 ± 1.60.940.80
    • View popup
    TABLE 5

    SUVmean and SUVmax Measured from PET Scans and Estimated 18F−/18F-FDG Uptake in Lesions

    PCorrelation (r)
    ValueLesion18F−/18F-FDG18F-FDG18F-NaFEstimated 18F−/18F-FDG18F−/18F-FDG and 18F-FDG18F−/18F-FDG and estimated 18F−/18F-FDG18F−/18F-FDG and 18F-FDG18F−/18F-FDG and 18F-NaF18F−/18F-FDG and estimated 18F−/18F-FDG
    SUVmeanAll lesions*7.3 ± 4.62.2 ± 1.710.0 ± 10.06.8 ± 4.2<0.001<0.0070.100.840.88
    Extraskeletal lesions4.3 ± 2.43.7 ± 2.10.9 ± 0.44.1 ± 2.10.300.250.900.350.88
    Skeletal lesions8.3 ± 4.71.7 ± 1.012.6 ± 9.97.4 ± 4.3<0.001<0.0010.500.860.92
    Skeletal lesions, PC patient7.3 ± 4.01.5 ± 0.810.2 ± 6.76.5 ± 3.5<0.001<0.0030.230.830.85
    Skeletal lesions, non–PC patient10.5 ± 5.52.3 ± 1.218.7 ± 13.49.6 ± 5.2<0.001<0.0010.690.880.98
    Osteolytic lesions10.9 ± 5.53.0 ± 1.014.5 ± 8.69.8 ± 5.1<0.001<0.020.510.880.96
    Osteoblastic lesions7.8 ± 4.41.5 ± 0.812.3 ± 10.07.0 ± 4.0<0.001<0.0010.450.860.90
    Background†2.3 ± 0.61.8 ± 0.41.1 ± 0.42.4 ± 0.6<0.0010.480.700.720.81
    SUVmaxAll lesions*15.4 ± 11.44.7 ± 4.727.4 ± 28.816.9 ± 12.4<0.001<0.0010.290.820.91
    Extraskeletal lesions9.5 ± 9.48.4 ± 6.32.2 ± 1.69.4 ± 6.70.610.870.940.910.94
    Skeletal lesions17.3 ± 11.33.4 ± 2.834.5 ± 28.919.1 ± 12.8<0.001<0.0020.510.890.91
    Skeletal lesions, PC patient15.0 ± 9.62.7 ± 2.429.2 ± 23.917.3 ± 12.4<0.001<0.0010.270.850.88
    Skeletal lesions, non–PC patient23.0 ± 13.55.2 ± 3.048.0 ± 35.823.8 ± 12.7<0.0010.190.690.910.98
    Osteolytic lesions21.6 ± 9.96.8 ± 2.336.8 ± 17.723.4 ± 8.5<0.0010.060.340.820.96
    Osteoblastic lesions16.6 ± 11.52.9 ± 2.534.2 ± 30.318.4 ± 13.2<0.001<0.0010.520.900.90
    Background†3.3 ± 0.82.7 ± 0.71.8 ± 0.53.8 ± 0.9<0.002<0.020.520.520.67
    • ↵* All lesions: both extraskeletal lesions and skeletal lesions.

    • ↵† Background: uptake at left atrium for patient with malignant lesions.

    • PC = prostate cancer.

    • View popup
    TABLE 6

    T/B Ratios from PET Scans and Estimated 18F−/18F-FDG Measurements

    ValueLesion18F−/18F-FDG18F-FDG18F-NaFEstimated 18F−/18F-FDGP
    T/B ratio by SUVmeanAll lesions*3.3 ± 2.21.2 ± 1.19.3 ± 9.72.8 ± 1.7<0.001
    Extraskeletal lesions2.1 ± 1.82.1 ± 1.80.9 ± 0.41.9 ± 1.20.21
    Skeletal lesions3.6 ± 2.21.0 ± 0.811.7 ± 9.73.0 ± 1.80.006
    Skeletal lesions, prostatecancer patient3.3 ± 2.00.9 ± 0.99.4 ± 6.72.7 ± 1.5<0.001
    Skeletal lesions, non–prostate cancer patient4.4 ± 2.31.2 ± 0.617.6 ± 13.24.0 ± 2.2<0.005
    Osteolytic lesions4.6 ± 1.71.7 ± 0.613.9 ± 6.64.3 ± 2.00.28
    Osteoblastic lesions3.4 ± 2.20.9 ± 0.811.4 ± 10.12.8 ± 1.7<0.001
    T/B ratio by SUVmaxAll lesions*4.8 ± 3.61.7 ± 1.714.6 ± 14.04.3 ± 3.0<0.007
    Extraskeletal lesions3.3 ± 4.23.1 ± 2.41.4 ± 1.12.5 ± 1.90.09
    Skeletal lesions5.2 ± 3.31.2 ± 1.218.3 ± 13.74.8 ± 3.1<0.03
    Skeletal lesions, prostate cancer patient4.7 ± 3.11.1 ± 1.216.0 ± 12.24.6 ± 3.10.61
    Skeletal lesions, non–prostate cancer patient6.2 ± 3.61.6 ± 1.124.2 ± 15.75.1 ± 3.1<0.003
    Osteolytic lesions6.5 ± 3.02.4 ± 1.222.9 ± 9.86.4 ± 3.30.62
    Osteoblastic lesions5.0 ± 3.31.1 ± 1.117.6 ± 14.24.5 ± 3.00.011
    • ↵* All lesions: both soft-tissue lesions and bone lesions.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Data

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Supplemental Data
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 56 (5)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 56, Issue 5
May 1, 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Semiquantitative Analysis of the Biodistribution of the Combined 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG Administration for PET/CT Imaging
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Semiquantitative Analysis of the Biodistribution of the Combined 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG Administration for PET/CT Imaging
Ryogo Minamimoto, Camila Mosci, Mehran Jamali, Amir Barkhodari, Frezghi Habte, Tatianie Jackson, Erik Mittra, Sanjiv Sam Gambhir, Andrei Iagaru
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2015, 56 (5) 688-694; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.115.153767

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Semiquantitative Analysis of the Biodistribution of the Combined 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG Administration for PET/CT Imaging
Ryogo Minamimoto, Camila Mosci, Mehran Jamali, Amir Barkhodari, Frezghi Habte, Tatianie Jackson, Erik Mittra, Sanjiv Sam Gambhir, Andrei Iagaru
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2015, 56 (5) 688-694; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.115.153767
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • This Month in JNM
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Bone-Targeted Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy in Prostate Cancer
  • Imaging Bone Metastases in Breast Cancer: Staging and Response Assessment
  • Prospective Comparison of 99mTc-MDP Scintigraphy, Combined 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG PET/CT, and Whole-Body MRI in Patients with Breast and Prostate Cancer
  • 18F-Fluoride PET in the Assessment of Malignant Bone Disease
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Cardiac Presynaptic Sympathetic Nervous Function Evaluated by Cardiac PET in Patients with Chronotropic Incompetence Without Heart Failure
  • Validation and Evaluation of a Vendor-Provided Head Motion Correction Algorithm on the uMI Panorama PET/CT System
  • Left Ventricular Strain from Myocardial Perfusion PET Imaging: Method Development and Comparison to 2-Dimensional Echocardiography
Show more Clinical Investigations

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • 18F-NaF
  • 18F-FDG
  • PET/CT
  • SUV
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire