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
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 12/2016

12.06.2016 | Original Article

Comparison of bone scintigraphy and 68Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer

verfasst von: Thomas Pyka, Shozo Okamoto, Marielena Dahlbender, Robert Tauber, Margitta Retz, Matthias Heck, Nagara Tamaki, Markus Schwaiger, Tobias Maurer, Matthias Eiber

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 12/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of our study was to compare the diagnostic performance of 68Ga-PSMA PET and 99mTc bone scintigraphy (BS) for the detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer (PC) patients.

Methods

One hundred twenty-six patients who received planar BS and PSMA PET within three months and without change of therapy were extracted from our database. Bone lesions were categorized into benign, metastatic, or equivocal by two experienced observers. A best valuable comparator (BVC) was defined based on BS, PET, additional imaging, and follow-up data. The cohort was further divided into clinical subgroups (primary staging, biochemical recurrence, and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer [mCRPC]). Additionally, subgroups of patients with less than 30 days delay between the two imaging procedures and with additional single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) were analyzed.

Results

A total of 75 of 126 patients were diagnosed with bone metastases. Sensitivities and specificities regarding overall bone involvement were 98.7–100 % and 88.2–100 % for PET, and 86.7–89.3 % and 60.8–96.1 % (p < 0.001) for BS, with ranges representing results for ‘optimistic’ or ‘pessimistic’ classification of equivocal lesions. Out of 1115 examined bone regions, 410 showed metastases. Region-based analysis revealed a sensitivity and specificity of 98.8–99.0 % and 98.9–100 % for PET, and 82.4–86.6 % and 91.6–97.9 % (p < 0.001) for BS, respectively. PSMA PET also performed better in all subgroups, except patient-based analysis in mCRPC.

Conclusion

Ga-PSMA PET outperforms planar BS for the detection of affected bone regions as well as determination of overall bone involvement in PC patients. Our results indicate that BS in patients who have received PSMA PET for staging only rarely offers additional information; however, prospective studies, including a standardized integrated x-ray computed tomography (SPECT/CT) protocol, should be performed in order to confirm the presented results.
Literatur
1.
Even-Sapir E. Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(8):1356–67.PubMed
2.
Bubendorf L, Schopfer A, Wagner U, Sauter G, Moch H, Willi N, et al. Metastatic patterns of prostate cancer: an autopsy study of 1,589 patients. Hum Pathol. 2000;31(5):578–83.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Thompson I, Thrasher JB, Aus G, BuRnett AL, Canby-Hagino ED, Cookson MS, et al. Guideline for the management of clinically localized prostate cancer: 2007 update. J Urol. 2007;177(6):2106–31.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der Kwast T, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent-update 2013. Eur Urol. 2014;65(1):124–37.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Mohler JL, Kantoff PW, Armstrong AJ, Bahnson RR, Cohen M, D’Amico AV, et al. Prostate cancer, version 2.2014. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2014;12(5):686–718.PubMed
6.
Jacobson AF, Fogelman I. Bone scanning in clinical oncology: does it have a future? Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25(9):1219–23.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Schirrmeister H, Glatting G, Hetzel J, Nussle K, Arslandemir C, Buck AK, et al. 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. 2001;42(12):1800–4.PubMed
8.
Lee N, Fawaaz R, Olsson CA, Benson MC, Petrylak DP, Schiff PB, et al. Which patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer need a radionuclide bone scan? an analysis based on 631 patients. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48(5):1443–6.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Picchio M, Spinapolice EG, Fallanca F, Crivellaro C, Giovacchini G, Gianolli L, 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.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Lecouvet FE, El Mouedden J, Collette L, Coche E, Danse E, Jamar F, 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.CrossRefPubMed
11.
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(2):287–97.PubMed
12.
Eder M, Schafer M, Bauder-Wust U, Hull WE, Wangler C, Mier W, et al. 68Ga-complex lipophilicity and the targeting property of a urea-based PSMA inhibitor for PET imaging. Bioconjug Chem. 2012;23(4):688–97.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Haberkorn U, Eder M, Eisenhut M, Zechmann CM. [68Ga]Gallium-labelled PSMA ligand as superior PET tracer for the diagnosis of prostate cancer: comparison with 18F-FECH. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39(6):1085–6.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Schafer M, Bauder-Wust U, Leotta K, Zoller F, Mier W, Haberkorn U, et al. A dimerized urea-based inhibitor of the prostate-specific membrane antigen for 68Ga-PET imaging of prostate cancer. EJNMMI Res. 2012;2(1):23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Maurer T, Gschwend JE, Rauscher I, Souvatzoglou M, Haller B, Weirich G et al. Diagnostic efficacy of 68Gallium-PSMA-PET compared to conventional imaging in lymph node staging of 130 consecutive patients with intermediate to high-risk prostate cancer. J Urol. 2015 (in press).
16.
Eiber M, Maurer T, Souvatzoglou M, Beer AJ, Ruffani A, Haller B, et al. Evaluation of hybrid (6)(8)Ga-PSMA ligand PET/CT in 248 patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(5):668–74.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M, Martinez-Moeller A, Furst S, Holzapfel K, Maurer T, et al. PET/MR in prostate cancer: technical aspects and potential diagnostic value. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40 Suppl 1:S79–88.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Utsunomiya D, Shiraishi S, Imuta M, Tomiguchi S, Kawanaka K, Morishita S, et al. Added value of SPECT/CT fusion in assessing suspected bone metastasis: comparison with scintigraphy alone and nonfused scintigraphy and CT. Radiology. 2006;238(1):264–71.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Jambor I, Kuisma A, Ramadan S, Huovinen R, Sandell M, Kajander 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.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Afshar-Oromieh A, Avtzi E, Giesel FL, Holland-Letz T, Linhart HG, Eder M, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT imaging with the (68)Ga-labelled PSMA ligand HBED-CC in the diagnosis of recurrent prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(2):197–209.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Pyka T, Weirich G, Einspieler I, Maurer T, Theisen J, Hatzichristodoulou G et al. [68Ga]PSMA-HBED PET for differential diagnosis of suspicious lung lesions in patients with prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2015.
22.
Krohn T, Verburg FA, Pufe T, Neuhuber W, Vogg A, Heinzel A, et al. [(68)Ga]PSMA-HBED uptake mimicking lymph node metastasis in coeliac ganglia: an important pitfall in clinical practice. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(2):210–4.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Pollen JJ, Witztum KF, Ashburn WL. The flare phenomenon on radionuclide bone scan in metastatic prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1984;142(4):773–6.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of bone scintigraphy and 68Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer
verfasst von
Thomas Pyka
Shozo Okamoto
Marielena Dahlbender
Robert Tauber
Margitta Retz
Matthias Heck
Nagara Tamaki
Markus Schwaiger
Tobias Maurer
Matthias Eiber
Publikationsdatum
12.06.2016
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 12/2016
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-016-3435-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2016

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 12/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Letter to the Editor

Strategy based on kinetics of O-(2-[18F] fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine ([18F] FET)

Letter to the Editor

Comments on Van den Wyngaert et al., The EANM practice guidelines for bone scintigraphy

Reply

Reply to: Starck et al.

Original Article

Prospective evaluation of [11C]Choline PET/CT in therapy response assessment of standardized docetaxel first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced castration refractory prostate cancer

Original Article

Striatal hypometabolism in premanifest and manifest Huntington’s disease patients

Original Article

ImmunoPET for assessing the differential uptake of a CD146-specific monoclonal antibody in lung cancer