Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Jul 1;28(19):3154-9.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.27.5743. Epub 2010 Jun 1.

Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer

Patrick G Morris  1 , Colleen Lynch, John N Feeney, Sujata Patil, Jane Howard, Steven M Larson, Maura Dickler, Clifford A Hudis, Maxine Jochelson, Heather L McArthur
Affiliations

Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer

Patrick G Morris et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Purpose: Although the accurate detection of osseous metastases in the evaluation of patients with suspected metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has significant prognostic and therapeutic implications, the ideal diagnostic approach is uncertain. In this retrospective, single-institution study, we compare the diagnostic performance of integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and bone scintigraphy (BSc) in women with suspected MBC.

Patients and methods: Women with suspected MBC evaluated with PET/CT and BSc (within 30 days) between January 1, 2003 and June 30, 2008, were identified through institutional databases. Electronic medical records were reviewed, and radiology reports were classified as positive/negative/equivocal for osseous metastases. A nuclear medicine radiologist (blinded to correlative and clinical end points) reviewed all equivocal PET/CT and BSc images and reclassified some reports. Final PET/CT and BSc classifications were compared. Baseline patient/tumor characteristics and bone pathology were recorded and compared to the final imaging results.

Results: We identified 163 women who had a median age of 52 years (range, 30 to 90 years); 32% had locally advanced breast cancer, 42% had been diagnosed with breast cancer less than 12 weeks before identification. Twenty studies were originally deemed equivocal (five with PET/CT, and 15 with BSc), and 13 (65%) of these studies were reclassified after radiology review. Overall, PET/CT and BSc were highly concordant for reporting osseous metastases with 132 paired studies (81%); 32 (20%) were positive, and 100 (61%) were negative. Thirty-one occurrences (19%) were discordant. Twelve of these (39%) had pathology confirming osseous metastases: nine (of 18) were PET/CT positive and BSc negative; one (of three) was PET/CT positive and BSc equivocal; and two (of two) were PET/CT equivocal and BSc negative.

Conclusion: This study supports the use of PET/CT in detecting osseous metastases for suspected MBC. Whether PET/CT may supplant BSc in this setting is unknown.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
Study flow diagram. MBC, metastatic breast cancer; PET/CT, integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography; BSc, bone scintigraphy; FNA, fine-needle aspiration.
Fig 2.
Fig 2.
Example of discordant positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) and bone scintigraphy results. A 45-year-old woman with biopsy-proven left iliac osseous metastasis detected on (A) axial PET/CT image (gold arrow), but (B) not bone scintigraphy. A 58-year-old woman with biopsy-proven metastatic breast cancer to (C) L4 on coronal PET image (blue arrow), but (D) not bone scintigraphy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hillner BE, Weeks JC, Desch CE, et al. Pamidronate in prevention of bone complications in metastatic breast cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:72–79. - PubMed
    1. Hamaoka T, Madewell JE, Podoloff DA, et al. Bone imaging in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2942–2953. - PubMed
    1. Fogelman I, Cook G, Israel O, et al. Positron emission tomography and bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med. 2005;35:135–142. - PubMed
    1. Fuster D, Duch J, Paredes P, et al. Preoperative staging of large primary breast cancer with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography compared with conventional imaging procedures. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4746–4751. - PubMed
    1. American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging. http://www.cancerstaging.org/staging/index.html.

Publication types