[11C]Choline PET/CT detection of bone metastases in patients with PSA progression after primary treatment for prostate cancer: comparison with bone scintigraphy
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of [11C]choline positron emission tomography (PET)/CT in comparison with bone scintigraphy (BS) in detecting bone metastases (BM) of patients with biochemical progression after radical treatment for prostate cancer (PCa).
Seventy-eight consecutive patients with biochemical progression of PCa (mean prostate-specific antigen 21.1 ng/ml, range 0.2–500.0 ng/ml) referred for both [11C]choline PET/CT and BS for restaging purposes were retrospectively analysed. The diagnostic accuracy of [11C]choline PET/CT and BS was assessed by using morphological imaging and/or follow-up as standards of reference. As equivocal findings were found, the accuracy analysis was performed twice, once including them as positive and once as negative. A separate analysis was also performed in hormone-resistant patients and data compared with those of patients who did not receive anti-androgenic treatment.
Equivocal findings occurred in 1 of 78 (1%) cases in [11C]choline PET/CT and in 21 of 78 (27%) cases in BS. Depending on their attribution as either positive or negative, the ranges of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy for [11C]choline PET/CT were 89–89%, 98–100%, 96–100%, 94–96% and 95–96%, respectively. For BS they were 100–70%, 75–100%, 68-–100%, 100–86% and 83–90%, respectively. Concordant findings between [11C]choline PET/CT and BS occurred in 55 of 78 (71%) cases. The accuracy of [11C]choline PET/CT did not significantly (p = 0.30) differ between hormone-resistant patients (97%) and those who did not receive anti-androgenic treatment (95%).
In clinical practice, [11C]choline PET/CT may not replace BS because of its lower sensitivity. However, for its high specificity, [11C]choline PET/CT positive findings may accurately predict the presence of BM. Equivocal findings are more frequent in BS than [11C]choline PET/CT.
- Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010;60(5):277–300. CrossRef
- Coleman RE. Metastatic bone disease: clinical features, pathophysiology and treatment strategies. Cancer Treat Rev 2001;27(3):165–76. CrossRef
- Johansson JE, Holmberg L, Johansson S, Bergström R, Adami HO. Fifteen-year survival in prostate cancer. A prospective, population-based study in Sweden. JAMA 1997;277(6):467–71. CrossRef
- Saad F, Lipton A, Cook R, Chen YM, Smith M, Coleman R. Pathologic fractures correlate with reduced survival in patients with malignant bone disease. Cancer 2007;110(8):1860–7. CrossRef
- Han M, Partin AW, Zahurak M, Piantadosi S, Epstein JI, Walsh PC. Biochemical (prostate specific antigen) recurrence probability following radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 2003;169(2):517–23. CrossRef
- Fuccio C, Castellucci P, Schiavina R, Santi I, Allegri V, Pettinato V, et al. Role of 11C-choline PET/CT in the restaging of prostate cancer patients showing a single lesion on bone scintigraphy. Ann Nucl Med 2010;24(6):485–92. CrossRef
- 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(1):61–71. CrossRef
- Damber JE, Aus G. Prostate cancer. Lancet 2008;371(9625):1710–21. CrossRef
- Price DT, Coleman RE, Liao RP, Robertson CN, Polascik TJ, DeGrado TR. Comparison of [18F]fluorocholine and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for positron emission tomography of androgen dependent and androgen independent prostate cancer. J Urol 2002;168(1):273–80. CrossRef
- Abuzallouf S, Dayes I, Lukka H. Baseline staging of newly diagnosed prostate cancer: a summary of the literature. J Urol 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2122–7. CrossRef
- Carlin BI, Andriole GL. The natural history, skeletal complications, and management of bone metastases in patients with prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2000;88(12 Suppl):2989–94. CrossRef
- Rudoni M, Antonini G, Favro M, Baroli A, Brambilla M, Cardani G, et al. The clinical value of prostate-specific antigen and bone scintigraphy in the staging of patients with newly diagnosed, pathologically proven prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1995;22(3):207–11. CrossRef
- Cher ML, Bianco FJ, Lam JS, Davis LP, Grignon DJ, Sakr WA, et al. Limited role of radionuclide bone scintigraphy in patients with prostate specific antigen elevations after radical prostatectomy. J Urol 1998;160(4):1387–91. CrossRef
- Jacobson AF, Fogelman I. Bone scanning in clinical oncology: does it have a future? Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25(9):1219–23. CrossRef
- Mottet N, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2011;59(4):572–83. CrossRef
- Boellaard R, O’Doherty MJ, Weber WA, Mottaghy FM, Lonsdale MN, Stroobants SG, et al. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37(1):181–200. CrossRef
- Hricak H, Choyke PL, Eberhardt SC, Leibel SA, Scardino PT. Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective. Radiology 2007;243(1):28–53. CrossRef
- Beheshti M, Langsteger W, Fogelman I. Prostate cancer: role of SPECT and PET in imaging bone metastases. Semin Nucl Med 2009;39(6):396–407. CrossRef
- 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(11):1253–8. CrossRef
- Picchio M, Crivellaro C, Giovacchini G, Gianolli L, Messa C. PET-CT for treatment planning in prostate cancer. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;53(2):245–68.
- Picchio M, Briganti A, Fanti S, Heidenreich A, Krause BJ, Messa C, et al. The role of choline positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of patients with prostate-specific antigen progression after radical treatment of prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2011;59:51–60. CrossRef
- Beheshti M, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Fitz F, Nader M, Loidl W, et al. Detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer by 18F fluorocholine and 18F fluoride PET-CT: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35(10):1766–74. CrossRef
- Picchio M, Messa C, Landoni C, Gianolli L, Sironi S, Brioschi M, et al. Value of [11C]choline-positron emission tomography for re-staging prostate cancer: a comparison with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. J Urol 2003;169(4):1337–40. CrossRef
- Schöder H, Larson SM. Positron emission tomography for prostate, bladder, and renal cancer. Semin Nucl Med 2004;34(4):274–92. CrossRef
- Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Coradeschi E, Bettinardi V, Gianolli L, Scattoni V, et al. Predictive factors of [(11)C]choline PET/CT in patients with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37(2):301–9. CrossRef
- Picchio M, Landoni C, Messa C, Gianolli L, Matarrese M, De Cobelli F, et al. Positive [11C]choline and negative [18F]FDG with positron emission tomography in recurrence of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179(2):482–4.
- Castellucci P, Fuccio C, Nanni C, Santi I, Rizzello A, Lodi F, et al. Influence of trigger PSA and PSA kinetics on 11C-choline PET/CT detection rate in patients with biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy. J Nucl Med 2009;50(9):1394–400. CrossRef
- Cimitan M, Bortolus R, Morassut S, Canzonieri V, Garbeglio A, Baresic T, et al. [18F]fluorocholine PET/CT imaging for the detection of recurrent prostate cancer at PSA relapse: experience in 100 consecutive patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33(12):1387–98. CrossRef
- 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.
- 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(23):3440–7. CrossRef
- Beheshti M, Vali R, Waldenberger P, Fitz F, Nader M, Hammer J, et al. The use of F-18 choline PET in the assessment of bone metastases in prostate cancer: correlation with morphological changes on CT. Mol Imaging Biol 2009;11(6):446–54. CrossRef
- Serpa Neto A, Tobias-Machado M, Esteves MA, Senra MD, Wroclawski ML, Fonseca FL, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of bone metabolism in prostate adenocarcinoma. BMC Urol 2010;10:9. CrossRef
- Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Coradeschi E, Scattoni V, Bettinardi V, Cozzarini C, et al. [(11)C]choline uptake with PET/CT for the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer: relation to PSA levels, tumour stage and anti-androgenic therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35(6):1065–73. CrossRef
- Fuccio C, Schiavina R, Castellucci P, Rubello D, Martorana G, Celli M, et al. Androgen deprivation therapy influences the uptake of (11)C-choline in patients with recurrent prostate cancer: the preliminary results of a sequential PET/CT study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011.
- [11C]Choline PET/CT detection of bone metastases in patients with PSA progression after primary treatment for prostate cancer: comparison with bone scintigraphy
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Volume 39, Issue 1 , pp 13-26
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Positron emission tomography
- Bone scintigraphy
- Prostate cancer recurrence
- Bone metastases
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Nuclear Medicine Department, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Via Olgettina 60, 20132, Milan, Italy
- 2. Institute for Bioimaging and Molecular Physiology, National Research Council (IBFM-CNR), Milan, Italy
- 3. Center for Molecular Bioimaging, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
- 4. Institute of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
- 5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy