Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Konkret geht es um den Diabetes-Patienten mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen oder Risiken, die Herzinsuffizienz sowie die kardiovaskuläre Primär- und Sekundärprävention. Sind Sie hier schon auf dem neuesten Stand? Unsere Experten beleuchten, wo und warum das bisherige Procedere geändert werden soll und was in der Praxis sinnvoll ist. Holen Sie sich Ihr Update und 2 CME-Punkte beim MMW-Webinar am 24. April von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Skeletal Radiology
Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology 12/2019

24.05.2019 | Scientific Article

Comparison of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

verfasst von: Jing Zhou, Zhengxing Gou, Renhui Wu, Yuan Yuan, Guiquan Yu, Yigang Zhao

Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology | Ausgabe 12/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

A systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, Sodium Fluoride (NaF) PET/CT, MRI, and bone scintigraphy (BS) in detecting bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer.

Methods

We searched PubMed and Embase for articles published between January 1990 and September 2018. Two evaluators independently extracted the sensitivity, specificity, the numbers of true and false positives, and true and false negatives. We calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each method. We calculated the tests’ diagnostic odds ratios (DOR); drew the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves; and obtained the areas under the curves (AUC), Q* values, and 95% CIs.

Results

The per-patient pooled sensitivities of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and BS were 0.97, 0.87, 0.96, 0.91, and 0.86, respectively. The pooled specificities were 1.00, 0.99, 0.97, 0.96, and 0.95, respectively. The pooled DOR values were 504.16, 673.67, 242.63, and 114.44, respectively. The AUC were 1.00, 0.99, 0.99, 0.98, and 0.95, respectively. The per-lesion pooled sensitivities of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and bone imaging were 0.88, 0.80, 0.97, 0.81 and 0.68, respectively.

Conclusions

According to the meta-analysis, PSMA-PET/CT had the highest per-patient sensitivity and specificity in detecting bone metastases with prostate cancer. The sensitivities of NaF-PET/CT and MRI were better than those for choline-PET/CT and BS. The specificity of PSMA-PET/CT was significantly better than BS. Others were similar. For per-lesion, NaF-PET/CT had the highest sensitivity, PSMA-PET/CT had higher sensitivity than choline-PET/CT and MRI, and BS had the lowest sensitivity.
Literatur
1.
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;0:3–31.
2.
Bubendorf L, Schöpfer A, Wagner U, et al. Metastatic patterns of prostate cancer: an autopsy study of 1,589 patients. Hum Pathol. 2000;31(5):578–83.PubMed
3.
Langsteger W, Rezaee A, Pirich C, Beheshti M. (18)F-NaF-PET/CT and (99m)Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2016;46(6):491–501.PubMed
4.
Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Mishani E, Lievshitz G, Lerman H, Leibovitch I. 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. 2006;47:287–97.
5.
Giovanella L, Castellani M, Suriano S, et al. Multi-field-of-view SPECT is superior to whole-body scanning for assessing metastatic bone disease in patients with prostate cancer. Tumori. 2011;97(5):629–33.PubMed
6.
Lecouvet FE, El Mouedden J, Collette L, et al. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? Eur Urol. 2012;62(1):68–75.PubMed
7.
Lecouvet FE, Geukens D, Stainier A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton for detecting bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: diagnostic and cost-effectiveness and comparison with current detection strategies. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(22):3281–7.PubMed
8.
Woo S, Kim SY, Kim SH, Cho JY. JOURNAL CLUB: identification of bone metastasis with routine prostate MRI: a study of patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206(6):1156–63.PubMed
9.
Woo S, Suh CH, Kim SY, Cho JY, Kim SH. Diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of bone metastasis in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2018;73(1):81–91.PubMed
10.
Shen G, Deng H, Hu S, Jia Z. Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Skelet Radiol. 2014;43(11):1503–13.
11.
Richter JA, Rodriguez M, Rioja J, et al. Dual tracer 11C-choline and FDG-PET in the diagnosis of biochemical prostate cancer relapse after radical treatment. Mol Imaging Biol. 2010;12(2):210–7.PubMed
12.
Cimitan M, Bortolus R, Morassut S, et al. [18F]fluorocholine PET/CT imaging for the detection of recurrent prostate cancer at PSA relapse: experience in 100 consecutive patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33(12):1387–98.PubMed
13.
Fuccio C, Castellucci P, Schiavina R, et al. Role of 11C-choline PET/CT in the restaging of prostate cancer patients showing a single lesion on bone scintigraphy. Ann Nucl Med. 2010;24(6):485–92.PubMed
14.
Picchio M, Spinapolice EG, Fallanca F, et al. [11C]choline PET/CT detection of bone metastases in patients with PSA progression after primary treatment for prostate cancer: comparison with bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39(1):13–26.PubMed
15.
Corfield J, Perera M, Bolton D, Lawrentschuk N. (68)Ga-prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) for primary staging of high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review. World J Urol. 2018;36(4):519–27.PubMed
16.
Perera M, Papa N, Christidis D, et al. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictors of positive (68)Ga-prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2016;70(6):926–37.PubMed
17.
Kitajima K, Fukushima K, Yamamoto S, et al. Diagnostic performance of (11)C-choline PET/CT and bone scintigraphy in the detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer. Nagoya J Med Sci. 2017;79(3):387–99.PubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Lengana T, Lawal IO, Boshomane TG, et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT replacing bone scan in the initial staging of skeletal metastasis in prostate cancer: a fait accompli? Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2018;16(5):392–401.PubMed
19.
Uprimny C, Svirydenka A, Fritz J, et al. Comparison of [(68)Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT with [(18)F]NaF PET/CT in the evaluation of bone metastases in metastatic prostate cancer patients prior to radionuclide therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(11):1873–83.PubMed
20.
Schwenck J, Rempp H, Reischl G, et al. Comparison of (68)Ga-labelled PSMA-11 and (11)C-choline in the detection of prostate cancer metastases by PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44(1):92–101.PubMed
21.
Janssen JC, Meissner S, Woythal N, et al. Comparison of hybrid (68)Ga-PSMA-PET/CT and (99m)Tc-DPD-SPECT/CT for the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer patients: additional value of morphologic information from low dose CT. Eur Radiol. 2018;28(2):610–9.PubMed
22.
Zacho HD, Nielsen JB, Afshar-Oromieh A, et al. Prospective comparison of (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT, (18)F-sodium fluoride PET/CT and diffusion weighted-MRI at for the detection of bone metastases in biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45(11):1884–97.PubMed
23.
Wondergem M, van der Zant FM, Knol RJJ, et al. (99m)Tc-HDP bone scintigraphy and (18)F-sodiumfluoride PET/CT in primary staging of patients with prostate cancer. World J Urol. 2018;36(1):27–34.PubMed
24.
Kawanaka Y, Kitajima KD, Yamamoto S, et al. Comparison of 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and conventional imaging for detection of recurrent prostate cancer. Cureus. 2018;10(7):e2966.PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Kitajima K, Murphy RC, Nathan MA, et al. Detection of recurrent prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy: comparison of 11C-choline PET/CT with pelvic multiparametric MR imaging with endorectal coil. J Nucl Med. 2014;55(2):223–32.PubMed
26.
Takesh M, Odat Allh K, Adams S, Zechmann C. Diagnostic role of (18)F-FECH-PET/CT compared with bone scan in evaluating the prostate cancer patients referring with biochemical recurrence. ISRN Oncol. 2012;2012:815234.PubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Fonager RF, Zacho HD, Langkilde NC, et al. Diagnostic test accuracy study of 18F-sodium fluoride PET_CT, 99mTc-labelled diphosphonate SPECT_CT, and planar bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in newly diagnosed, high-risk prostate cancer. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;7(5):218–27.PubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Beheshti M, Vali R, Waldenberger P, et al. Detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer by 18F fluorocholine and 18F fluoride PET-CT: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(10):1766–74.PubMed
29.
Venkitaraman R, Cook GJ, Dearnaley DP, et al. Does magnetic resonance imaging of the spine have a role in the staging of prostate cancer? Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2009;21(1):39–42.
30.
Huysse W, Lecouvet F, Castellucci P, et al. Prospective comparison of F-18 choline PET/CT scan versus axial MRI for detecting bone metastasis in biochemically relapsed prostate cancer patients. Diagnostics (Basel). 2017;7:56.
31.
Poulsen MH, Petersen H, Hoilund-Carlsen PF, et al. Spine metastases in prostate cancer: comparison of technetium-99m-MDP whole-body bone scintigraphy, [(18) F]choline positron emission tomography(PET)/computed tomography (CT) and [(18) F]NaF PET/CT. BJU Int. 2014;114(6):818–23.PubMed
32.
Mosavi F, Johansson S, Sandberg DT, Turesson I, Sörensen J, Ahlström H. Whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI compared with 18F-NaF PET/CT for detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199(5):1114–20.
33.
Venkitaraman R, Cook GJR, Dearnaley DP, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of skeletal metastases in patients with prostate cancer. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2009;53:241–7.PubMed
34.
Wieder H, Maurer T, Beer AJ, et al. 11C-choline PET_CT and whole-body MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging for patients with recurrent prostate cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;8(39):66516–27.PubMedPubMedCentral
35.
36.
Nozaki T, Yasuda K, Akashi T, Fuse H. Usefulness of single photon emission computed tomography imaging in the detection of lumbar vertebral metastases from prostate cancer. Int J Urol. 2008;15(6):516–9.PubMed
37.
Lecouvet FE, Simon M, Tombal B, Jamart J, Vande Berg BC, Simoni P. Whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) versus axial skeleton MRI (AS-MRI) to detect and measure bone metastases in prostate cancer (PCa). Eur Radiol. 2010;20(12):2973–82.PubMed
38.
Harmon SA, Perk T, Lin C, et al. Quantitative assessment of early [18F]sodium fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography response to treatment in men with metastatic prostate cancer to bone. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:24.
39.
Beheshti M, Mottaghy FM, Paycha F, et al. 18F-NaF PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for bone imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(11):1767–77.PubMed
40.
Ceci F, Herrmann K, Castellucci P, et al. Impact of 11C-choline PET/CT on clinical decision making in recurrent prostate cancer: results from a retrospective two-centre trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(12):2222–31.PubMed
41.
Ceci F, Castellucci P, Graziani T, et al. 11C-choline PET/CT detects the site of relapse in the majority of prostate cancer patients showing biochemical recurrence after EBRT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(5):878–86.PubMed
42.
Ceci F, Castellucci P, Mamede M, et al. 11C-choline PET/CT in patients with hormone-resistant prostate cancer showing biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(2):149–55.PubMed
43.
Dyrberg E, Larsen EL, Hendel HW, Thomsen HS. Diagnostic bone imaging in patients with prostate cancer: patient experience and acceptance of NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, whole-body MRI, and bone SPECT/CT. Acta Radiol. 2018;59(9):1119–25.PubMed
44.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Zechmann CM, Malcher A, et al. Comparison of PET imaging with a 68Ga-labelled PSMA ligand and 18F-choline-based PET/CT for the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:11–20.PubMed
45.
46.
Freitag MT, Radtke JP, Hadaschik BA, et al. Comparison of hybrid (68)Ga-PSMA PET/MRI and (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in the evaluation of lymph node and bone metastases of prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(1):70–83.PubMed
47.
48.
Morigi JJ, Stricker PD, van Leeuwen PJ, et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-Fluoromethylcholine versus 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer patients who have rising PSA after curative treatment and are being considered for targeted therapy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(8):1185–90.PubMed
49.
Pyka T, Okamoto S, Dahlbender M, et al. Comparison of bone scintigraphy and (68)Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(12):2114–21.PubMed
50.
Iagaru A, Mittra E, Dick DW, Gambhir SS. Prospective evaluation of (99m)Tc MDP scintigraphy, (18)F NaF PET/CT, and (18)F FDG PET/CT for detection of skeletal metastases. Mol Imaging Biol. 2012;14(2):252–9.PubMed
51.
Apolo AB, Lindenberg L, Shih JH, et al. Prospective study evaluating Na18F PET/CT in predicting clinical outcomes and survival in advanced prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(6):886–92.PubMedPubMedCentral
52.
Jambor I, Kuisma A, Ramadan S, et al. Prospective evaluation of planar bone scintigraphy, SPECT, SPECT/CT, 18F-NaF PET/CT and whole body 1.5T MRI, including DWI, for the detection of bone metastases in high risk breast and prostate cancer patients: SKELETA clinical trial. Acta Oncol. 2016;55(1):59–67.PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of PSMA-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, MRI, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
verfasst von
Jing Zhou
Zhengxing Gou
Renhui Wu
Yuan Yuan
Guiquan Yu
Yigang Zhao
Publikationsdatum
24.05.2019
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Skeletal Radiology / Ausgabe 12/2019
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-019-03230-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2019

Skeletal Radiology 12/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Technical Report

Motion compensation in extremity cone-beam computed tomography

Review Article

Imaging of the post-operative medial elbow in the overhead thrower: common and abnormal findings after ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction and ulnar nerve transposition

Scientific Article

Radiographic signs of hook of hamate fracture: evaluation of diagnostic utility

Scientific Article

Change in MRI findings of medial collateral ligament injury in adolescent baseball players with no clinical symptoms over time

Scientific Article

Dual-layer spectral computerized tomography for metal artifact reduction: small versus large orthopedic devices

Correction

Correction to: Ultrasound localization of lacerated flexor tendon ends in the hand: a cadaveric study

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

18.04.2024 | Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin | Nachrichten

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

13.04.2024 | Klinik aktuell | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

08.04.2024 | Andrologie | Nachrichten

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

29.03.2024 | Diagnostische Radiologie | Nachrichten

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie
weitere anzeigen

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen