18F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in newly diagnosed, high-risk prostate cancer patients: study protocol for a multicentre, diagnostic test accuracy study

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Randi F. Fonager ; Helle D. Zacho ; Niels C. Langkilde ; Lars J. Petersen
• 关键词：Positron emission tomography/computed tomography ; 18F ; fluoride ; Planar bone scintigraphy ; Bone metastases ; Prostate cancer
• 刊名：BMC Cancer
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：December 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：16
• 期：1
• 全文大小：885 KB
• 参考文献：1.Damber JE, Aus G. Prostate cancer. Lancet. 2008;371:1710–21.PubMed CrossRef
  2.Logothetis CJ, Lin SH. Osteoblasts in prostate cancer metastasis to bone. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5:21–8.PubMed CrossRef
  3.Nørgaard M, Jensen AO, Jacobsen JB, Cetin K, Fryzek JP, Sørensen HT. Skeletal related events, bone metastasis and survival of prostate cancer: a population based cohort study in Denmark (1999 to 2007). J Urol. 2010;184:162–7.PubMed CrossRef
  4.Mohler JL. The 2010 NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology on prostate cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2010;8:145.PubMed
  5.Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol. 2011;59:61–71.PubMed CrossRef
  6.Graham J, Kirkbride P, Cann K, Hasler E, Prettyjohns M. Prostate cancer: summary of updated NICE guidance. BMJ. 2014;348:f7524.PubMed CrossRef
  7.Bombardieri E, Aktolun C, Baum RP, Bishof-Delaloye A, Buscombe J, Chatal JF, et al. Bone scintigraphy: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:BP99–106.PubMed
  8.Zacho HD, Barsi T, Mortensen JC, Mogensen MK, Bertelsen H, Josephsen N, et al. Prospective multicenter study of bone scintigraphy in consecutive patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2014;39:26–31.PubMed CrossRef
  9.Palmedo H, Marx C, Ebert A, Kreft B, Ko Y, Turler A, et al. Whole-body SPECT/CT for bone scintigraphy: diagnostic value and effect on patient management in oncological patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:59–67.PubMed CrossRef
  10.Wondergem M, van der Zant FM, van der Ploeg T, Knol RJ. A literature review of 18F-fluoride PET/CT and 18F-choline or 11C-choline PET/CT for detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2013;34:935–45.PubMed CrossRef
  11.Wong KK, Piert M. Dynamic bone imaging with 99mTc-labeled diphosphonates and 18F-NaF: mechanisms and applications. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:590–9.PubMed CrossRef
  12.Blake GM, Park-Holohan SJ, Cook GJ, Fogelman I. Quantitative studies of bone with the use of 18F-fluoride and 99mTc-methylene diphosphonate. Semin Nucl Med. 2001;31:28–49.PubMed CrossRef
  13.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.PubMed
  14.Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM et al.: Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Fam Pract 2004;21:4–10.PubMed CrossRef
  15.Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, Glasziou P, Jaeschke R, Vist GE et al.: Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ 2008;336:1106–10.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  16.Klotz L, Boccon-Gibod L, Shore ND, Andreou C, Persson BE, Cantor P et al. The efficacy and safety of degarelix: a 12-month, comparative, randomized, open-label, parallel-group phase III study in patients with prostate cancer. BJU Int 2008;102:1531–38.PubMed CrossRef
  17.Nishiyama T: Serum testosterone levels after medical or surgical androgen deprivation: a comprehensive review of the literature. Urol Oncol 2014;32:38–28.PubMed CrossRef
  18.Labrie F, Dupont A, Belanger A, Giguere M, Lacoursiere Y, Emond J et al. Combination therapy with flutamide and castration (LHRH agonist or orchiectomy) in advanced prostate cancer: a marked improvement in response and survival. J Steroid Biochem 1985;23:833–41.PubMed CrossRef
  19.Labrie F, Dupont A, Belanger A, Cusan L, Lacourciere Y, Monfette G et al. New hormonal therapy in prostatic carcinoma: combined treatment with an LHRH agonist and an antiandrogen. Clin Invest Med 1982;5:267–75.PubMed
  20.Pollen JJ, Witztum KF, Ashburn WL: The flare phenomenon on radionuclide bone scan in metastatic prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1984;142:773–76.PubMed CrossRef
  21.Reza M, Bjartell A, Ohlsson M, Kaboteh R, Wollmer P, Edenbrandt L et al. Bone Scan Index as a prognostic imaging biomarker during androgen deprivation therapy. EJNMMI Res. 2014;4:58.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  22.Johns WD, Garnick MB, Kaplan WD: Leuprolide therapy for prostate cancer: An association with scintigraphic ''flare'' on bone scan. Clin Nucl Med. 1990;15:485–87.PubMed CrossRef
  23.Messiou C, Cook G, deSouza NM: Imaging metastatic bone disease from carcinoma of the prostate. Br J Cancer. 2009;101:1225–32.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  24.Scher HI: Prostate carcinoma: defining therapeutic objectives and improving overall outcomes. Cancer. 2003;97:758–71.PubMed CrossRef
  25.Brown MS, Chu GH, Kim HJ, len-Auerbach M, Poon C, Bridges J et al. Computer-aided quantitative bone scan assessment of prostate cancer treatment response. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:384–94.PubMed
  26.Heidenreich A, Bastian PJ, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, van der KT et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: Treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2014;65:467–79.PubMed CrossRef
  27.Donohoe KJ, Brown ML, Collier BD: Society of nuclear medicine procedure guideline for bone scintigraphy. Bone Scintigraphy. 2003;205:209.
  28.Hellwig D, Krause BJ, Schirrmeister H, Freesmeyer M: [Bone scanning with sodium 18F-fluoride PET and PET/CT. German guideline Version 1.0.]. Nuklearmedizin. 2010; 49:195–201.PubMed CrossRef
  29.Segall G, Delbeke D, Stabin MG, Even-Sapir E, Fair J, Sajdak R et al. SNM practice guideline for sodium 18F-fluoride PET/CT bone scans 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51:1813-1820.
  30.Schuetz GM, Schlattmann P, Dewey M: Use of 3x2 tables with an intention to diagnose approach to assess clinical performance of diagnostic tests: meta-analytical evaluation of coronary CT angiography studies. BMJ. 2012;345:e6717.PubMed PubMedCentral CrossRef
  31.Hayen A, Macaskill P, Irwig L, Bossuyt P: Appropriate statistical methods are required to assess diagnostic tests for replacement, add-on, and triage. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:883–91.PubMed CrossRef
  32.Brozek JL, Akl EA, Jaeschke R, Lang DM, Bossuyt P, Glasziou P et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: Part 2 of 3. The GRADE approach to grading quality of evidence about diagnostic tests and strategies. Allergy. 2009;64:1109–116.PubMed CrossRef
  33.Donohoe KJ, Brown ML, Collier BD. Society of nuclear medicine procedure guideline for bone scintigraphy. Bone Scintigraphy. 2003;205:209.
  34.Lecouvet FE, Talbot JN, Messiou C, Bourguet P, Liu Y, de Souza NM: Monitoring the response of bone metastases to treatment with Magnetic Resonance Imaging and nuclear medicine techniques: A review and position statement by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer imaging group. Eur J Cancer. 2014.
  35.Poonacha TK, Go RS: Level of scientific evidence underlying recommendations arising from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:186-91.
  36.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;14:252–59.PubMed CrossRef
  37.Damle NA, Bal C, Bandopadhyaya GP, Kumar L, Kumar P, Malhotra A et al. The role of 18F-fluoride PET-CT in the detection of bone metastases in patients with breast, lung and prostate carcinoma: a comparison with FDG PET/CT and 99mTc-MDP bone scan. Jpn J Radiol. 2013;31:262–69.PubMed CrossRef
  38.Withofs N, Grayet B, Tancredi T, Rorive A, Mella C, Giacomelli F et al.: (1)(8)F-fluoride PET/CT for assessing bone involvement in prostate and breast cancers. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32:168-76.
  39.National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Prostate Cancer (Version 2.2014). 2014. 6. Ref Type: Internet Communication.
  
• 作者单位：Randi F. Fonager (1)
  Helle D. Zacho (1) (3)
  Niels C. Langkilde (2)
  Lars J. Petersen (1) (3)
  
  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Hobrovej 18-22, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark
  3. Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Sdr. Skovvej 11, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark
  2. Department of Urology, Aalborg University Hospital, Reberbansgade 15, DK-9000, Aalborg, Denmark
  
• 刊物主题：Cancer Research; Oncology; Stem Cells; Animal Models; Internal Medicine;
• 出版者：BioMed Central
• ISSN：1471-2407

文摘

Background For decades, planar bone scintigraphy has been the standard practice for detection of bone metastases in prostate cancer and has been endorsed by recent oncology/urology guidelines. It is a sensitive method with modest specificity. 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography has shown improved sensitivity and specificity over bone scintigraphy, but because of methodological issues such as retrospective design and verification bias, the existing level of evidence with 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography is limited. The primary objective is to compare the diagnostic properties of 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography versus bone scintigraphy on an individual patient basis.