Abstract
Functional imaging, in particular dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI), has a role in differentiating benign from malignant cartilaginous tumors. Chondrosarcoma grade I or atypical cartilaginous tumor enhances within 10 s. of arterial enhancement. Enchondroma enhances after 10 s. or not at all. FDG-PET has the same uptake patterns in both enchondroma and chondrosarcoma grade I. A second diagnostic application is in identifying the small interstitial space of giant cell tumor. The resulting washout can be used in detecting recurrent disease.
Functional imaging techniques are becoming more important as it is shown that morphologic criteria, basically tumor volume, are insufficient to monitor response to treatment. DCE-MRI can be used to identify residual viable tumor after chemotherapy. DCE-MRI targets parameters that define angiogenesis. Under therapy, changes in capillary permeability (time-intensity curve shape and slope) and vascular density (maximum enhancement) are often observed before changes in tumor volume.
There have been conflicting reports on the usefulness of glucose metabolism imaged by 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) as a parameter to assess response to chemotherapy in sarcoma. Issues such as low specificity and differences between various sarcoma types need to be addressed. However, differences in metabolic volume depicted with 18F-FDG-PET have been reported to correlate with response. This tumor component correlates with the viable tumor as defined by early enhancement on DCE-MRI and seems a promising venue of further research. PET is gaining a place in detecting recurrent disease, also at sites distant from the original tumor.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Abbreviations
- CT:
-
Computed tomography
- DCE-MRI:
-
Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging
- MRI:
-
Magnetic resonance imaging
- PET:
-
Positron emission tomography
References
Bloem JL, et al. Bone tumors. Eur Radiol. 2000;10:207–12.
Eefting D, et al. Assessment of interobserver variability and histologic parameters to improve reliability in classification and grading of central cartilaginous tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:50–7.
Geirnaerdt MJ, et al. Usefulness of radiography in differentiating enchondroma from central grade 1 chondrosarcoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1097–104.
Geirnaerdt MJ, et al. Cartilaginous tumors: fast contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 2000;214:539–46.
Lee FY, et al. Diagnostic value and limitations of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for cartilaginous tumors of bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A:2677–85.
Rijswijk CSP, Bloem JL. Chapter 99: Monitoring therapy in bone and soft tissue tumors. In: Pope TL, Bloem JL, Beltran J, Morrison WB, Wilson DJ, editors. Imaging of the musculoskeletal system. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier; 2008. p. 1860–79. ISBN 978-1-4160-2963-2.
Rijswijk CSP, Bloem JL. Monitoring therapy in bone and soft tissue tumors. In: Pope TL, Bloem JL, Beltran J, Morrison WB, Wilson DJ, editors. Saunders/Elsevier; 2012 (in press).
Huvos AG, et al. Primary osteogenic sarcoma: pathologic aspects in 20 patients after treatment with chemotherapy en bloc resection, and prosthetic bone replacement. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1977;101:14–8.
van der Woude HJ, et al. Changes in tumor perfusion induced by chemotherapy in bone sarcomas: color Doppler flow imaging compared with contrast-enhanced MR imaging and three-phase bone scintigraphy. Radiology. 1994;191:421–31.
Picci P, et al. Chemotherapy-induced tumor necrosis as a prognostic factor in localized Ewing’s sarcoma of the extremities. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1553–9.
Taber DS, et al. Treated Ewing sarcoma: radiographic appearance in response, recurrence, and new primaries. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1983;140:753–8.
Holscher HC, et al. Can conventional radiographs be used to monitor the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with osteogenic sarcoma? Skeletal Radiol. 1996;25:19–24.
Erlemann R, et al. Response of osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma to preoperative chemotherapy: assessment with dynamic and static MR imaging and skeletal scintigraphy. Radiology. 1990;175:791–6.
Holscher HC, et al. Osteosarcoma: chemotherapy-induced changes at MR imaging. Radiology. 1992;182:839–44.
Costelloe CM, et al. Cancer response criteria and bone metastases: RECIST 1.1, MDA And PERCIST. J. Cancer. 2010;1:80–92.
van der Woude HJ, et al. Osteosarcoma and Ewing’s sarcoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: value of dynamic MR imaging in detecting viable tumor before surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;165:596–8.
Tofts PS, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10:223–32.
Verstraete KL, et al. Benign and malignant musculoskeletal lesions: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging—parametric “first-pass” images depict tissue vascularization and perfusion. Radiology. 1994;192:835–43.
Egmont-Petersen M, et al. Detection of areas with viable remnant tumor in postchemotherapy patients with Ewing’s sarcoma by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI using pharmacokinetic modeling. Magn Reson Imaging. 2000;18:525–35.
Baur A, Reiser MF. Diffusion-weighted imaging of the musculoskeletal system in humans. Skeletal Radiol. 2000;29:555–62.
van Rijswijk CSP, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in the characterization of soft-tissue tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002;15:302–7.
Oka K, et al. The value of diffusion-weighted imaging for monitoring the chemotherapeutic response of osteosarcoma: a comparison between average apparent diffusion coefficient and minimum apparent diffusion coefficient. Skeletal Radiol. 2010;39:141–6.
Schnapauff D, et al. Diffusion-weighted echo-planar magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of tumor cellularity in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009;29:1355–9.
Suh JY, et al. Is apparent diffusion coefficient reliable and accurate for monitoring effects of antiangiogenic treatment in a longitudinal study? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;35:1430–6.
Padhani AR, Miles KA. Multiparametric imaging of tumor response to therapy. Radiology. 2010;256:348–64.
Forsberg F, et al. Assessment of angiogenesis: implications for ultrasound imaging. Ultrasonics. 2004;42:325–30.
Taylor GA, et al. Vascularity of tumors in children: evaluation with color Doppler imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;157:1267–71.
Kiessling F, et al. Comparing dynamic parameters of tumor vascularization in nude mice revealed by magnetic resonance imaging and contrast-enhanced intermittent power Doppler sonography. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:516–24.
van der Woude HJ, et al. Treatment of high-grade bone sarcomas with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: the utility of sequential color Doppler sonography in predicting histopathologic response. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;165:125–33.
Benz MR, et al. Utilization of positron emission tomography in the management of patients with sarcoma. Curr Opin Oncol. 2009;21:345–51.
Treglia G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG-PET and PET/CT in patients with Ewing sarcoma family tumours: a systemic review and a meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol. 2012;41:249–56.
Gaston LL, et al. 18F-FDG PET response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma and osteosarcoma are different. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40:1007–15.
Hayashida Y, et al. Evaluation of diffusion-weighted imaging for the differential diagnosis of poorly contrast-enhanced and T2-prolonged bone masses: initial experience. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23:377–82.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bloem, J.L., van Rijswijk, C., Kroon, H.M. (2014). Bone Malignancies. In: Luna, A., Vilanova, J., Hygino Da Cruz Jr., L., Rossi, S. (eds) Functional Imaging in Oncology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40582-2_33
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40582-2_33
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40581-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40582-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)