Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone

Srinath C. Sampath, Srihari C. Sampath, Camila Mosci, Amelie M. Lutz, Juergen K. Willmann, Erik Mittra, Sanjiv S. Gambhir, Andrei Iagaru

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: Sodium fluoride PET (F-NaF) has recently reemerged as a valuable method for detection of osseous metastasis, with recent work highlighting the potential of coadministered F-NaF and F-FDG PET/CT in a single combined imaging examination. We further examined the potential of such combined examinations by comparing dual tracer F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT with CT alone for detection of osseous metastasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five participants with biopsy-proven malignancy were consecutively enrolled from a single center and underwent combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT and diagnostic CT scans. PET/CT as well as CT only images were reviewed in blinded fashion and compared with the results of clinical, imaging, or histological follow-up as a truth standard. RESULTS: Sensitivity of the combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was higher than that of CT alone (97.4% vs 66.7%). CT and F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT were concordant in 73% of studies. Of 20 discordant cases, F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was correct in 19 (95%). Three cases were interpreted concordantly but incorrectly, and all 3 were false positives. A single case of osseous metastasis was detected by CT alone, but not by F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: Combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT outperforms CT alone and is highly sensitive and specific for detection of osseous metastases. The concordantly interpreted false-positive cases demonstrate the difficulty of distinguishing degenerative from malignant disease, whereas the single case of metastasis seen on CT but not PET highlights the need for careful review of CT images in multimodality studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e173-e177
JournalClinical Nuclear Medicine
Volume40
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
Neoplasm Metastasis
Sodium Fluoride
Biopsy
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • bone
  • FDG
  • metastasis
  • NaF
  • PET/CT

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Sampath, S. C., Sampath, S. C., Mosci, C., Lutz, A. M., Willmann, J. K., Mittra, E., ... Iagaru, A. (2015). Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone. Clinical Nuclear Medicine, 40(3), e173-e177. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000000560

Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone. / Sampath, Srinath C.; Sampath, Srihari C.; Mosci, Camila; Lutz, Amelie M.; Willmann, Juergen K.; Mittra, Erik; Gambhir, Sanjiv S.; Iagaru, Andrei.

In: Clinical Nuclear Medicine, Vol. 40, No. 3, 01.01.2015, p. e173-e177.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sampath, SC, Sampath, SC, Mosci, C, Lutz, AM, Willmann, JK, Mittra, E, Gambhir, SS & Iagaru, A 2015, 'Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone', Clinical Nuclear Medicine, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. e173-e177. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000000560
Sampath, Srinath C. ; Sampath, Srihari C. ; Mosci, Camila ; Lutz, Amelie M. ; Willmann, Juergen K. ; Mittra, Erik ; Gambhir, Sanjiv S. ; Iagaru, Andrei. / Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone. In: Clinical Nuclear Medicine. 2015 ; Vol. 40, No. 3. pp. e173-e177.
@article{fdda6e6fa95440f0b527ac110915a7cb,
title = "Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone",
abstract = "PURPOSE: Sodium fluoride PET (F-NaF) has recently reemerged as a valuable method for detection of osseous metastasis, with recent work highlighting the potential of coadministered F-NaF and F-FDG PET/CT in a single combined imaging examination. We further examined the potential of such combined examinations by comparing dual tracer F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT with CT alone for detection of osseous metastasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five participants with biopsy-proven malignancy were consecutively enrolled from a single center and underwent combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT and diagnostic CT scans. PET/CT as well as CT only images were reviewed in blinded fashion and compared with the results of clinical, imaging, or histological follow-up as a truth standard. RESULTS: Sensitivity of the combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was higher than that of CT alone (97.4{\%} vs 66.7{\%}). CT and F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT were concordant in 73{\%} of studies. Of 20 discordant cases, F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was correct in 19 (95{\%}). Three cases were interpreted concordantly but incorrectly, and all 3 were false positives. A single case of osseous metastasis was detected by CT alone, but not by F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: Combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT outperforms CT alone and is highly sensitive and specific for detection of osseous metastases. The concordantly interpreted false-positive cases demonstrate the difficulty of distinguishing degenerative from malignant disease, whereas the single case of metastasis seen on CT but not PET highlights the need for careful review of CT images in multimodality studies.",
keywords = "bone, FDG, metastasis, NaF, PET/CT",
author = "Sampath, {Srinath C.} and Sampath, {Srihari C.} and Camila Mosci and Lutz, {Amelie M.} and Willmann, {Juergen K.} and Erik Mittra and Gambhir, {Sanjiv S.} and Andrei Iagaru",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/RLU.0000000000000560",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "e173--e177",
journal = "Clinical Nuclear Medicine",
issn = "0363-9762",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Detection of osseous metastasis by 18F-NaF/18F-FDG PET/CT versus CT alone

AU - Sampath, Srinath C.

AU - Sampath, Srihari C.

AU - Mosci, Camila

AU - Lutz, Amelie M.

AU - Willmann, Juergen K.

AU - Mittra, Erik

AU - Gambhir, Sanjiv S.

AU - Iagaru, Andrei

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - PURPOSE: Sodium fluoride PET (F-NaF) has recently reemerged as a valuable method for detection of osseous metastasis, with recent work highlighting the potential of coadministered F-NaF and F-FDG PET/CT in a single combined imaging examination. We further examined the potential of such combined examinations by comparing dual tracer F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT with CT alone for detection of osseous metastasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five participants with biopsy-proven malignancy were consecutively enrolled from a single center and underwent combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT and diagnostic CT scans. PET/CT as well as CT only images were reviewed in blinded fashion and compared with the results of clinical, imaging, or histological follow-up as a truth standard. RESULTS: Sensitivity of the combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was higher than that of CT alone (97.4% vs 66.7%). CT and F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT were concordant in 73% of studies. Of 20 discordant cases, F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was correct in 19 (95%). Three cases were interpreted concordantly but incorrectly, and all 3 were false positives. A single case of osseous metastasis was detected by CT alone, but not by F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: Combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT outperforms CT alone and is highly sensitive and specific for detection of osseous metastases. The concordantly interpreted false-positive cases demonstrate the difficulty of distinguishing degenerative from malignant disease, whereas the single case of metastasis seen on CT but not PET highlights the need for careful review of CT images in multimodality studies.

AB - PURPOSE: Sodium fluoride PET (F-NaF) has recently reemerged as a valuable method for detection of osseous metastasis, with recent work highlighting the potential of coadministered F-NaF and F-FDG PET/CT in a single combined imaging examination. We further examined the potential of such combined examinations by comparing dual tracer F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT with CT alone for detection of osseous metastasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-five participants with biopsy-proven malignancy were consecutively enrolled from a single center and underwent combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT and diagnostic CT scans. PET/CT as well as CT only images were reviewed in blinded fashion and compared with the results of clinical, imaging, or histological follow-up as a truth standard. RESULTS: Sensitivity of the combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was higher than that of CT alone (97.4% vs 66.7%). CT and F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT were concordant in 73% of studies. Of 20 discordant cases, F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT was correct in 19 (95%). Three cases were interpreted concordantly but incorrectly, and all 3 were false positives. A single case of osseous metastasis was detected by CT alone, but not by F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT. CONCLUSIONS: Combined F-NaF/F-FDG PET/CT outperforms CT alone and is highly sensitive and specific for detection of osseous metastases. The concordantly interpreted false-positive cases demonstrate the difficulty of distinguishing degenerative from malignant disease, whereas the single case of metastasis seen on CT but not PET highlights the need for careful review of CT images in multimodality studies.

KW - bone

KW - FDG

KW - metastasis

KW - NaF

KW - PET/CT

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84922679441&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84922679441&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000560

DO - 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000560

M3 - Article

C2 - 25140557

AN - SCOPUS:84922679441

VL - 40

SP - e173-e177

JO - Clinical Nuclear Medicine

JF - Clinical Nuclear Medicine

SN - 0363-9762

IS - 3

ER -