These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: 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.
    Author: Fonager RF, Zacho HD, Langkilde NC, Fledelius J, Ejlersen JA, Hendel HW, Haarmark C, Moe M, Mortensen JC, Jochumsen MR, Petersen LJ.
    Journal: Acta Oncol; 2018 Aug; 57(8):1063-1069. PubMed ID: 29447047.
    Abstract:
    AIM: To compare 18F-sodium fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography (NaF PET/CT) and 99mTc-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] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]