Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cost comparison of 111In-DTPA-octreotide scintigraphy and 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT for staging enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Although somatostatin receptor positron emission tomography (PET)/CT is gaining increasing popularity and has shown its diagnostic superiority in several studies, 111In-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA)-octreotide is still the current standard for diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumours (NET). The aim of this study was to compare the costs for the two diagnostic tests and the respective consequential costs.

Methods

From January 2009 to July 2009, 51 consecutive patients with enteropancreatic NET who underwent contrast-enhanced 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT (n = 29) or 111In-DTPA-octreotide (mean 3 whole-body scans plus 1.6 low-dose single photon emission computed tomography/CT; n = 22) were included. For cost analysis, direct costs (equipment) and variable costs (material, labour) per examination were calculated. Additionally required CT and/or MRI examinations within the staging process were assessed as consequential costs. An additional deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed.

Results

A 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT examination yielded total costs (equipment, personnel and material costs) of 548 €. On the other hand, an 111In-DTPA-octreotide examination resulted in 827 € total costs. Costs for equipment and material had a share of 460 €/720 € for 68Ga-DOTATOC/111In-DTPA-octreotide and labour costs of 89 €/106 €. With 68Ga-DOTATOC additional MRI had to be performed in 7% of the patients resulting in a mean of 20 € for supplementary imaging per patient; 82% of patients with 111In-DTPA-octreotide needed additional MRI and/or CT resulting in mean additional costs of 161 € per patient.

Conclusion

68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT was considerably cheaper than 111In-DTPA-octreotide with respect to both material and personnel costs. Furthermore, by using 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT considerably fewer additional examinations were needed reducing the consequential costs significantly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Modlin IM, Lye KD, Kidd M. A 5-decade analysis of 13,715 carcinoid tumors. Cancer 2003;97(4):934–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Klöppel G, Couvelard A, Perren A, Komminoth P, McNicol AM, Nilsson O, et al. ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the Standards of Care in Neuroendocrine Tumors: towards a standardized approach to the diagnosis of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and their prognostic stratification. Neuroendocrinology 2009;90(2):162–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rambaldi PF, Cuccurullo V, Briganti V, Mansi L. The present and future role of (111)In pentetreotide in the PET era. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;49(3):225–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Krenning EP, Kwekkeboom DJ, Bakker WH, Breeman WA, Kooij PP, Oei HY, et al. Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with [111In-DTPA-D-Phe1]- and [123I-Tyr3]-octreotide: the Rotterdam experience with more than 1000 patients. Eur J Nucl Med 1993;20(8):716–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bombardieri E, Ambrosini V, Aktolun C, Baum RP, Bishof-Delaloye A, Del Vecchio S, et al. 111In-pentetreotide scintigraphy: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37(7):1441–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kowalski J, Henze M, Schuhmacher J, Mäcke HR, Hofmann M, Haberkorn U. Evaluation of positron emission tomography imaging using [68Ga]-DOTA-D Phe(1)-Tyr(3)-octreotide in comparison to [111In]-DTPAOC SPECT. First results in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Mol Imaging Biol 2003;5(1):42–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Buchmann I, Henze M, Engelbrecht S, Eisenhut M, Runz A, Schäfer M, et al. Comparison of 68Ga-DOTATOC PET and 111In-DTPAOC (Octreoscan) SPECT in patients with neuroendocrine tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34(10):1617–26.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Hartmann H, Zöphel K, Freudenberg R, Oehme L, Andreeff M, Wunderlich G, et al. Radiation exposure of patients during 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT examinations. Nuklearmedizin 2009;48(5):201–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gocke P, Debatin JF, Dürselen LF. Process management and controlling in diagnostic radiology in the hospital. Radiologe 2002;42(5):332–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Balon HR, Goldsmith SJ, Siegel BA, Silberstein EB, Krenning EP, Lang O, et al. Procedure guideline for somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with (111)In-pentetreotide. J Nucl Med 2001;42(7):1134–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhernosekov KP, Filosofov DV, Baum RP, Aschoff P, Bihl H, Razbash AA, et al. Processing of generator-produced 68Ga for medical application. J Nucl Med 2007;48(10):1741–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Yao JC, Hassan M, Phan A, Dagohoy C, Leary C, Mares JE, et al. One hundred years after “carcinoid”: epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol 2008;26(18):3063–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kocha W, Maroun J, Kennecke H, Law C, Metrakos P, Ouellet JF, et al. Consensus recommendations for the diagnosis and management of well-differentiated gastroenterohepatic neuroendocrine tumours: a revised statement from a Canadian National Expert Group. Curr Oncol 2010;17(3):49–64.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Janson ET, Sørbye H, Welin S, Federspiel B, Grønbaek H, Hellman P, et al. Nordic Guidelines 2010 for diagnosis and treatment of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Acta Oncol 2010;49(6):740–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Arnold R, Chen YJ, Costa F, Falconi M, Gross D, Grossman AB, et al. ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the Standards of Care in Neuroendocrine Tumors: follow-up and documentation. Neuroendocrinology 2009;90(2):227–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sundin A, Vullierme MP, Kaltsas G, Plöckinger U, Mallorca Consensus Conference participants, European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society. ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the Standards of Care in Neuroendocrine Tumors: radiological examinations. Neuroendocrinology 2009;90(2):167–83.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Plathow C, Walz M, Lichy MP, Aschoff P, Pfannenberg C, Bock H, et al. Cost considerations for whole-body MRI and PET/CT as part of oncologic staging. Radiologe 2008;48(4):384–96.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Schmidt GP, Haug AR, Schoenberg SO, Reiser MF. Whole-body MRI and PET-CT in the management of cancer patients. Eur Radiol 2006;16(6):1216–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Baum RP, Prasad V, Hörsch D. Molekulare Bildgebung neuroendokriner Tumoren mit 68Ga-markierten Peptiden (Somatostatinrezeptor-PET/CT). Nuklearmediziner 2009;32:115–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Krenning EP, Bakker WH, Breeman WA, Koper JW, Kooij PP, Ausema L, et al. Localisation of endocrine-related tumours with radioiodinated analogue of somatostatin. Lancet 1989;1(8632):242–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Krenning EP, Bakker WH, Kooij PP, Breeman WA, Oei HY, de Jong M, et al. Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with indium-111-DTPA-D-Phe-1-octreotide in man: metabolism, dosimetry and comparison with iodine-123-Tyr-3-octreotide. J Nucl Med 1992;33(5):652–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Smith-Jones PM, Stolz B, Bruns C, Albert R, Reist HW, Fridrich R, et al. Gallium-67/gallium-68-[DFO]-octreotide–a potential radiopharmaceutical for PET imaging of somatostatin receptor-positive tumors: synthesis and radiolabeling in vitro and preliminary in vivo studies. J Nucl Med 1994;35(2):317–25.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. de Jong M, Bakker WH, Krenning EP, Breeman WA, van der Pluijm ME, Bernard BF, et al. Yttrium-90 and indium-111 labelling, receptor binding and biodistribution of [DOTA0, d-Phe1, Tyr3]octreotide, a promising somatostatin analogue for radionuclide therapy. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24(4):368–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Otte A, Mueller-Brand J, Dellas S, Nitzsche EU, Herrmann R, Maecke HR. Yttrium-90-labelled somatostatin-analogue for cancer treatment. Lancet 1998;351(9100):417–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Antunes P, Ginj M, Zhang H, Waser B, Baum RP, Reubi JC, et al. Are radiogallium-labelled DOTA-conjugated somatostatin analogues superior to those labelled with other radiometals? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34(7):982–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Ruf J, Heuck F, Schiefer J, Denecke T, Elgeti F, Pascher A, et al. Impact of multiphase 68Ga-DOTATOC-PET/CT on therapy management in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Neuroendocrinology 2010;91(1):101–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Gabriel M, Decristoforo C, Kendler D, Dobrozemsky G, Heute D, Uprimny C, et al. 68Ga-DOTA-Tyr3-octreotide PET in neuroendocrine tumors: comparison with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and CT. J Nucl Med 2007;48(4):508–18.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Krausz Y, Freedman N, Rubinstein R, Lavie E, Orevi M, Tshori S, et al. (68)Ga-DOTA-NOC PET/CT imaging of neuroendocrine tumors: comparison with (111)In-DTPA-octreotide (OctreoScan®). Mol Imaging Biol 2011;13(3):583–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany

    Nils F. Schreiter, Winfried Brenner, Ralph Buchert & Vikas Prasad

  2. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, Kohasu, Oko-cho, Nankoku, Kochi, 783-8505, Japan

    Munenobu Nogami

  3. Imaging Science Institute Charité Berlin, Siemens Robert-Koch-Platz 7, 10115, Berlin, Germany

    Alexander Huppertz

  4. Department of Gastroenterology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany

    Ulrich-Frank Pape

  5. Department of Radiology, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany

    Bernd Hamm & Martin H. Maurer

Authors
  1. Nils F. Schreiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Winfried Brenner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Munenobu Nogami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ralph Buchert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alexander Huppertz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ulrich-Frank Pape
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Vikas Prasad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Bernd Hamm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Martin H. Maurer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nils F. Schreiter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schreiter, N.F., Brenner, W., Nogami, M. et al. Cost comparison of 111In-DTPA-octreotide scintigraphy and 68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT for staging enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 39, 72–82 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-011-1935-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-011-1935-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation