Evaluation of radiographic and metabolic changes in bone metastases in response to systemic therapy with ¹⁸FDG-PET/CT

1. Du Y, Cullum I, Illidge TM, Ell PJ. Fusion of metabolic function and morphology: sequential [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positronemission tomography/ computed tomography studies yield new insights into the natural history of bone metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 3440-7.10.1200/JCO.2007.11.2854Search in Google Scholar

2. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, Hortobagyi GN, Ueno NT. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 2942-53.10.1200/JCO.2004.08.181Search in Google Scholar

3. Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, Yeung HW, Cristofanilli M, Macapinlac HA. Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT. Radiology 2008; 247: 189-96.10.1148/radiol.2471070567Search in Google Scholar

4. Bellamy EA, Nicholas D, Ward M, Coombes RC, Powles TJ, Husband JE. Comparison of computed tomography and conventional radiology in the assessment of treatment response of lytic bony metastases in patients with carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol 1987; 38: 351-5.10.1016/S0009-9260(87)80207-6Search in Google Scholar

5. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 228-47.10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.02619097774Search in Google Scholar

6. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 122S-50S.10.2967/jnumed.108.057307275524519403881Search in Google Scholar

7. Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 496-507.10.1056/NEJMra05027616452561Search in Google Scholar

8. Evangelista L, Panunzio A, Polverosi R, Ferretti A, Chondrogiannis S, Pomerri F, et al. Early bone marrow metastasis detection: the additional value of FDG-PET/CT vs. CT imaging. Biomed Pharmacother 2012; 66: 448-53.10.1016/j.biopha.2012.06.00422902054Search in Google Scholar

9. Qu X, Huang X, Yan W, Wu L, Dai K. A meta-analysis of ¹⁸FDG-PET-CT, ¹⁸FDGPET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 1007-15.10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.12621354739Search in Google Scholar

10. Yang HL, Liu T, Wang XM, Xu Y, Deng SM. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing ¹⁸FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. Eur Radiol 2011; 21: 2604-17.10.1007/s00330-011-2221-421887484Search in Google Scholar

11. Ben-Haim S, Israel O. Breast cancer: Role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 2009; 39: 408-15.10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2009.05.00219801220Search in Google Scholar

12. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: Differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3375-9.10.1200/JCO.1998.16.10.33759779715Search in Google Scholar

13. Schirrmeister H. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by positron emission tomography. Radiol Clin North Am 2007; 45: 669-76.10.1016/j.rcl.2007.05.00717706531Search in Google Scholar

14. Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, Aramaki T, Morimoto N, Endo M. Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1266-73.10.2214/ajr.184.4.0184126615788608Search in Google Scholar

15. Tateishi U, Gamez C, Dawood S, Yeung HW, Cristofanilli M, Macapinlac HA. Bone metastases in patients with metastatic breast cancer: morphologic and metabolic monitoring of response to systemic therapy with integrated PET/CT. Radiology 2008; 247: 189-96.10.1148/radiol.247107056718372468Search in Google Scholar

16. Du Y, Cullum I, Illidge TM, Ell PJ. Fusion of metabolic function and morphology: sequential [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/ computed tomography studies yield new insights into the natural history of bone metastases in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 3440-7.10.1200/JCO.2007.11.285417592153Search in Google Scholar

17. Lipton A. Pathophysiology of bone metastases: How this knowledge may lead to therapeutic intervention. J Support Oncol 2004; 2: 205-22.Search in Google Scholar

18. Basu S,Torigian D, Alavi A. Evolving concept of imaging bone marrow metastasis in the twenty-first century: critical role of FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35: 465-71.10.1007/s00259-007-0593-017955239Search in Google Scholar

19. Ben-Haim S, Israel O. Breast cancer: Role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 2009; 39: 408-15.10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2009.05.002Search in Google Scholar

20. Cook GJ, Houston S, Rubens R, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in breast cancer by 18FDG PET: Differing metabolic activity in osteoblastic and osteolytic lesions. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 3375-9.10.1200/JCO.1998.16.10.3375Search in Google Scholar

21. Uematsu T, Yuen S, Yukisawa S, Aramaki T, Morimoto N, Endo M, et al: Comparison of FDG PET and SPECT for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1266-73.10.2214/ajr.184.4.01841266Search in Google Scholar

22. Nakai T, Okuyama C, Kubota T, Yamada K, Ushijima Y, Taniike K, et al: Pitfalls of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of osteoblastic bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 1253-8.10.1007/s00259-005-1842-816133397Search in Google Scholar

23. Abe K, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Koga H, Baba S, Hayashi K, et al: Comparison of 18FDG-PET with 99mTc-HMDP scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med 2005; 19: 573-79.10.1007/BF0298505016363622Search in Google Scholar

24. An YS, Yoon JK, Lee MH, Joh CW, Yoon SN. False negative F-18 FDG PET/CT in nonsmall cell lung cancer bone metastases. Clin Nucl Med 2005; 30: 203-4.10.1097/00003072-200503000-0001715722832Search in Google Scholar

25. von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC, Hany TF: Integrated PET/CT: Current applications and future directions. Radiology 2006; 238: 405-22.10.1148/radiol.238204197716436809Search in Google Scholar