Abstract
Introduction
Technetium (Tc) methylene diphosphonate (MDP) has been the standard method for bone scintigraphy for three decades. 18F sodium fluoride (18F NaF) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) has better resolution and is considered superior. The role of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose (18F FDG) PET/CT is proven in a variety of cancers, for which it has changed the practice of oncology. There are few prospective studies comparing these three methods of detection of skeletal metastases. Thus, we were prompted to initiate this prospective pilot trial.
Methods
This is a prospective study (Sep 2007–Dec 2010) of 52 patients with proven malignancy referred for evaluation of skeletal metastases. There were 37 men and 15 women, 19–84 years old (average, 55.6 ± 15.9). Technetium-99m (99mTc) MDP bone scintigraphy, 18F NaF PET/CT, and 18F FDG PET/CT were subsequently performed within 1 month.
Results
Skeletal lesions were detected by 99mTc MDP bone scintigraphy in 22 of 52 patients, by 18F NaF PET/CT in 24 of 52 patients, and by 18F FDG PET/CT in 16 of 52 patients. The image quality and evaluation of extent of disease were superior by 18F NaF PET/CT over 99mTc MDP scintigraphy in all 22 patients with skeletal lesions on both scans and over 18F FDG PET/CT in 11 of 16 patients with skeletal metastases on 18F FDG PET/CT. In two patients, 18F NaF PET/CT showed skeletal metastases not seen on either of the other two scans. Extraskeletal lesions were identified by 18F FDG PET/CT in 28 of 52 subjects.
Conclusion
Our prospective pilot-phase trial demonstrates superior image quality and evaluation of skeletal disease extent with 18F NaF PET/CT over 99mTc MDP scintigraphy and 18F FDG PET/CT. At the same time, 18F FDG PET detects extraskeletal disease that can significantly change disease management. As such, a combination of 18F FDG PET/CT and 18F NaF PET/CT may be necessary for cancer detection. Additional evaluation with larger cohorts is required to confirm these preliminary findings.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bombardieri E, Aktolun C, Baum RP et al (2003) Bone scintigraphy: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30(12):BP99–BP106
Jacobson AF, Fogelman I (1998) Bone scanning in clinical oncology: does it have a future? Eur J Nucl Med 25(9):1219–1223
Even-Sapir E (2005) Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. J Nucl Med 46(8):1356–1367
Schirrmeister H, Glatting G, Hetzel J et al (2001) Prospective evaluation of the clinical value of planar bone scans, SPECT, and (18)F-labeled NaF PET in newly diagnosed lung cancer. J Nucl Med 42(12):1800–1804
Min JW, Um SW, Yim JJ et al (2009) The role of whole-body FDG PET/CT, Tc 99m MDP bone scintigraphy, and serum alkaline phosphatase in detecting bone metastasis in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer. J Korean Med Sci 24(2):275–280
Chua S, Gnanasegaran G, Cook GJ (2009) Miscellaneous cancers (lung, thyroid, renal cancer, myeloma, and neuroendocrine tumors): role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 39(6):416–430
Hsu WK, Virk MS, Feeley BT, Stout DB, Chatziioannou AF, Lieberman JR (2008) Characterization of osteolytic, osteoblastic, and mixed lesions in a prostate cancer mouse model using 18F-FDG and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med 49(3):414–421
Chen YW, Huang MY, Hsieh JS, Hou MF, Chou SH, Lin CL (2007) Discordant findings of skeletal metastasis between tc 99M MDP bone scans and F18 FDG PET/CT imaging for advanced breast and lung cancers—two case reports and literature review. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 23(12):639–646
Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Elsner K et al (1999) Sensitivity in detecting osseous lesions depends on anatomic localization: planar bone scintigraphy versus 18F PET. J Nucl Med 40(10):1623–1629
Ben-Haim S, Israel O (2009) Breast cancer: role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 39(6):408–415
Bridges RL, Wiley CR, Christian JC, Strohm AP (2007) An introduction to Na(18)F bone scintigraphy: basic principles, advanced imaging concepts, and case examples. J Nucl Med Technol 35(2):64–76, quiz 78–69
Shirazi PH, Rayudu GV, Fordham EW (1974) 18F bone scanning: review of indications and results of 1,500 scans. Radiology 112(2):361–368
Grant FD, Fahey FH, Packard AB, Davis RT, Alavi A, Treves ST (2008) Skeletal PET with 18F-fluoride: applying new technology to an old tracer. J Nucl Med 49(1):68–78
Gamie S, El-Maghraby T (2008) The role of PET/CT in evaluation of Facet and Disc abnormalities in patients with low back pain using (18)F-fluoride. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur 11(1):17–21
Drubach LA, Sapp MV, Laffin S, Kleinman PK (2008) Fluorine-18 NaF PET imaging of child abuse. Pediatr Radiol 38(7):776–779
Bhargava P, Hanif M, Nash C (2008) Whole-body F-18 sodium fluoride PET-CT in a patient with renal cell carcinoma. Clin Nucl Med 33(12):894–895
Lim R, Fahey FH, Drubach LA, Connolly LP, Treves ST (2007) Early experience with fluorine-18 sodium fluoride bone PET in young patients with back pain. J Pediatr Orthop 27(3):277–282
Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I (2006) 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 47(2):287–297
Even-Sapir E, Mishani E, Flusser G, Metser U (2007) 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med 37(6):462–469
Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Flusser G et al (2004) Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: initial experience with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18F-fluoride PET and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med 45(2):272–278
Hetzel M, Arslandemir C, Konig HH et al (2003) F-18 NaF PET for detection of bone metastases in lung cancer: accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and impact on patient management. J Bone Miner Res 18(12):2206–2214
Schirrmeister H, Buck A, Guhlmann A, Reske SN (2001) Anatomical distribution and sclerotic activity of bone metastases from thyroid cancer assessed with F-18 sodium fluoride positron emission tomography. Thyroid 11(7):677–683
Cook GJ, Fogelman I (2001) Detection of bone metastases in cancer patients by 18F-fluoride and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Q J Nucl Med 45(1):47–52
Blake GM, Park-Holohan SJ, Cook GJ, Fogelman I (2001) Quantitative studies of bone with the use of 18F-fluoride and 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate. Semin Nucl Med 31(1):28–49
Kruger S, Buck A, Mottaghy F et al (2009) Detection of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer: 99mTc-MDP planar bone scintigraphy, 18F-fluoride PET or 18F-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36(11):1807–1812
Feldman F, van Heertum R, Manos C (2003) 18FDG PET scanning of benign and malignant musculoskeletal lesions. Skeletal Radiol 32(4):201–208
Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S et al (2005) Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. Am J Roentgenol 184(4):1266–1273
Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T et al (2005) Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32(11):1253–1258
Meirelles GSP, Schoder H, Ravizzini GC et al (2010) Prognostic value of baseline [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and 99mTc-MDP bone scan in progressing metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 16(24):6093–6099
Jadvar H, Pinski J, Conti P (2003) FDG PET in suspected recurrent and metastatic prostate cancer. Oncol Rep 10(5):1485–1488
Shulkin B, Goodin G, McCarville M et al (2009) Bone and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography scanning for the assessment of osseous involvement in Hodgkin lymphoma in children and young adults. Leuk Lymphoma 50(11):1794–1802
Jadvar H, Conti P (2002) Diagnostic utility of FDG PET in multiple myeloma. Skeletal Radiol 31(12):690–694
Fogelman I, Cook G, Israel O, Van der Wall H (2005) Positron emission tomography and bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 35(2):135–142
Jadvar H, Gamie S, Ramanna L, Conti P (2004) Musculoskeletal system. Semin Nucl Med 34(4):254–261
Peterson J, Kransdorf M, O’Connor M (2003) Diagnosis of occult bone metastases: positron emission tomography. Clin Orthop Relat Res 415(Suppl):S120–S128
Acknowledgments
This research was supported in part by NCI ICMIC CA114747 (SSG), and the clinical studies were supported in part by the Doris Duke Foundation and Canary Foundation (SSG). We would also like to thank Dr. Fred Chin in the Cyclotron Facility, Lindee Burton, and all the technologists in the Nuclear Medicine Clinic.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Iagaru, A., Mittra, E., Dick, D.W. et al. Prospective Evaluation of 99mTc MDP Scintigraphy, 18F NaF PET/CT, and 18F FDG PET/CT for Detection of Skeletal Metastases. Mol Imaging Biol 14, 252–259 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-011-0486-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-011-0486-2