Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current role of bone scan with phosphonates in the follow-up of breast cancer

  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A number of studies have demonstrated that bone scintigraphy has high sensitivity and efficacy in the early detection of bone metastases from several tumours, including breast cancer. Bone scintigraphy is the most definitive tool for diagnosing and monitoring metastatic spread of breast cancer. However, in the past decade there has been a wide debate on its impact on survival time, morbidity and quality of life. Worldwide economic restrictions and these studies have led to the adoption of an almost minimalist policy for breast cancer follow-up using evidence-based guidelines. The recommended breast cancer surveillance testing includes only a few procedures (history, physical and breast self-examination, patient education on symptoms, pelvic examination). The routine use of additional tests, such as blood cell count, tumour markers, liver ultrasonography, bone scan and chest X-rays, is not recommended. Accordingly, scintigraphy should be reserved for a limited number of patients. On the other hand, early diagnosis of bone involvement may reduce the risk of skeletal related events, thus leading to a significant improvement in quality of life. Furthermore, new drugs (e.g. bisphosphonates) can now delay the onset of bone metastasis and reduce the number of patients who experience skeletal complications. In conclusion, the evidence of the clinical usefulness of bone scintigraphy (to allow early planning of new treatments in advanced disease) has to be re-evaluated, possibly by large randomised prospective trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Goldhirisch A, Gelber RD, Castiglione M for the Ludwig Breast Cancer Study Group. Relapse of breast cancer after adjuvant treatment in premenopausal and perimenopausal women: patterns and prognoses. J Clin Oncol 1997; 6:89–97.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kamby K, Senegelov L. Pattern of dissemination and survival following isolated locoregional recurrence of breast cancer: a prospective study with more than 10 years of follow-up. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 45:181–192.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Martin TJ, Moseley JM. Mechanisms in the skeletal complications of breast cancer. Endocr Relat Cancer 2000; 7:271–284.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hortobagyi GN, Theriault RL, Lipton A, et al. Long-term prevention of skeletal complications of metastatic breast cancer with pamidronate. Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16:2038–2044.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cook RJ, Major P. Methodology for treatment evaluation in patients with cancer metastatic to bone. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93:534–538.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mundy G. Metastatic bone disease. In: Fogelman I, ed. Bone remodelling and its disorders. London: Martin Dunitz; 1995:104–122.

  7. Corcoran RJ, Thrall JH, Kyle RW, Kaminski RJ, Johnson MC. Solitary abnormalities in bone scans of patients with extraosseous malignancies. Radiology 1976; 121(3 pt 1):663–667.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Batson OV. Function of vertebral veins and their role in spread and metastases. Ann Surg 1940; 112:138–149.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Morgan-Parkes JH. Metastases: mechanism, pathways, and cases. AJR 1995; 164:1075–1082.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. O’Sullivan JM, Cook GJR. A review of the efficacy of bone scanning in prostate and breast cancer. Q J Nucl Med 2002; 46:152–159.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Valagussa P, Bonadonna G, Veronesi U. Patterns of relapse and survival following radical mastectomy. Cancer 1978; 41:1170–1178.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Coleman SJ, Rubens RD. The clinical course of bone metastasis from breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1987; 55:61–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kamby C. The pattern of metastases in human breast cancer: methodological aspects and influence of prognostic factors. Cancer Treat Rev 1990; 17:37–61.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bombardieri E, Aktolun C, Baum RP, Bishof-Delaloye A, Buscombe J, Chatal JF, Maffioli L, Moncayo R, Mortelmans L, Reske SN. Bone scintigraphy procedures guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30:BP99–BP106.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Crippa F, Seregni E, Agresti R, Bombardieri E, Buraggi GL. Bone scintigraphy in breast cancer: a ten years follow up study. J Nucl Biol Med 1993; 37:57–61.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Algra PR, Heimans JH, Valk J, Nauta JJ, Lachniet M, Van Kooten B. Do metastases in vertebrae begin in the body or the pedicles? A J R Am J Roentgenol 1992; 158:1275–1279.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Savelli G, Maffioli L, Maccauro M, De Deckere E, Bombardieri E. Bone scintigraphy and the added value of SPET (single photon emission tomography) in detecting skeletal lesions. Q J Nucl Med 2001; 45:27–37.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Forza Operativa Nazionale sul Carcinoma Mammario (FONCaM). Linee guida sulla diagnosi, il trattamento e la ribilitazione. In: www.senologia.it/foncam/

  19. Loprinzi CC, Hayes D, Smith T. Doc, shouldn’t we be getting some tests? J Clin Oncol 2003; 21:108s–111s.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cocconi G. Follow up of patients with breast cancer (letter). JAMA 1994; 272:1657–1658.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Crippa F, Bombardieri E, Seregni E, Castellani MR, Gasparini M, Maffioli L, Pizzichetta M, Buraggi GL. Single determination of CA15.3 and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of skeletal metastases of breast cancer. J Nucl Biol Med 1992; 36:52–55.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Nicolini A, Ferrari P, Sagripanti A, Carpi A. The role of tumour markers in predicting skeletal metastases in breast cancer patients with equivocal bone scintigraphy. Br J Cancer 1999; 79:1443–1447.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bombardieri E, Martinetti A, Miceli R, Mariani L, Castellani MR, Seregni E. Can bone metabolism markers be adopted as an alternative to scintigraphic imaging in monitoring bone metastases from breast cancer? Eur J Nucl Med 1997; 24:1349–1355.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Younsi N, Montravers F, Philippe C, Seddiki M, Uzan S, Izrael V, Talbot JN. CA15.3 and bone scintigraphy in the follow up of breast cancer. Int J Biol Markers 1997; 12:154–157.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schapira DV, Urban N. A minimalist policy for breast cancer surveillance. JAMA 1991; 265:380–382.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wertheimer MD. Against minimalism in breast cancer follow-up. JAMA 1991; 265:396–397.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosselli del Turco M, Palli D, Cariddi, Ciatto S, Pacini P, Distante V. Intensive diagnostic follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer. JAMA 1994; 271:1593–1597.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. The GIVIO Investigators. Impact of follow-up testing on survival and health related quality of life in breast cancer patients. JAMA 1994; 271:1587–1592.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Smith TJ, Davidson NE, Schapira DV, Grunfeld E, Muss HB, Vogel VG III, Sommefield MR for the ASCO Breast Cancer Surveillance Expert Panel. American Society of Clinical Oncology 1988 Update of recommended breast cancer surveillance guidelines. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17:1080–1082.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Jemal A, Murray T, Samuels A, Ghafoor A, Ward E, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2003. CA Cancer J Clin 2003; 53:5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Giordano SH, Buzdar AU, Smith TL, Kau S-W, Yang Y, Hortobagyi GN. Is breast cancer survival improving? Trends in survival for patients with recurrent breast cancer diagnosed from 1974 through 2000. Cancer 2004; 100:44–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Talbäck M, Stenbeck M, Rosén M, Barlow L, Glimelius B. Cancer survival in Sweden 1960–1998. Acta Oncol 2003; 42:637–659.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wikenheiser KA, Silberstein EB. Bone scintigraphy screening in stage I–II breast cancer: is it cost effective? Cleve Clin J Med 1996; 63:43–47

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Drummond MF, Bloom BS, Carrin G, et al. Issues in the cross-national assessment of health technology. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1992; 8:671–682.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Major PP, Cook R. Efficacy of bisphosphonates in the management of skeletal complications of bone metastases and selection of clinical endpoints. Am J Clin Oncol 2002; 25 (6 Suppl 1):S10–S18.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Simon MC, Miron S, Severson RK, et al. Clinical surveillance of for early stage breast cancer. An analysis of claims data. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1996; 40:119–128.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Mille D, Roy T, Carrère M-O, Ray I, Ferdjaoui N, Späth H-M, Chauvin F, Philip T. Economic impact of harmonizing medical practices: compliance with clinical practice guidelines in the follow-up of breast cancer in a French comprehensive cancer center. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18:1718–1724.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Williams A. How should information on cost effectiveness influence clinical practice. In: Delamothe T, ed. Outcomes into clinical practice. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 1994:99–107.

  39. Grenberg PA, Hortobagyi GN, Smith TL, Ziegler LD, Frye DK, Buzdar AU. Long-term follow-up of patient with completed remission following combination chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14:2197–2205.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Nieto Y, Nawaz S, Jones RB, et al. Prognostic model for relapse after high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation for stage IV oligometastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20:707–718.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hortobagyi GN, Theriault RL, Porter L, et al. Efficacy of pamidronate in reducing skeletal complication in patients with breast cancer and lytic bone metastasis. Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group. N Engl J Med 1996; 335:1785–1791.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hortobagyi GN. Can we cure limited metastatic breast cancer? J Clin Oncol 2002; 20:620–623.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chen HHW, Su WC, Guo HR, Lee BF, Su WR, Wu PS, Chiu NT. Clinical significance and outcome of one or two rib lesions on bone scans in breast cancer patients without metastases. Nucl Med Commun 2003; 24:1167–1174.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Lipton A. Bisphosphonates and metastatic breast carcinoma. Cancer 2003; 97 (3 Suppl):848–853.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Riccardi A, Grasso D, Danova M. Bisphosphonates in oncology: physiopathology bases and clinical activity. Tumori 2003; 89:223–236.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Kanis JA. Bone and cancer. Pathophysiology and treatment of metastases. Bone 1995; 17:S101–S105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Nemoto R, Uchida K, Tsutsumi M, et al. A model of localized osteolysis induced by the MBT-2 tumor in mice and its responsiveness to etidronate disodium. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 1987; 113:539–543.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Colleoni M, O’Neill A, Goldhirsh A, et al. for the International (Ludwig) Breast Cancer Group. Identifying breast cancer patients at high risk for bone metastases. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18:3925–3935.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Hillner BE, Ingle JN, Berenson JR, Janjan NA, Albani KS, Lipton A, Yee G, Bierman JS, Chlebowski RT, Pfister DG for the American Society of Clinical Oncology Bisphosphonate Expert Panel. American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines on the role of bisphosphonates in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18:1378–1391.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Plunkett TA, Smith P, Rubens RD. Risk of complications from bone metastases in breast cancer: implications for management. Eur J Cancer 2000; 36:476–482.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Koizumi M, Matsumoto S, Takahashi S, Yamashita T, Ogata E. Bone metabolic markers in the evaluation of bone scan flare phenomenon in bone metastases of breast cancer. Clin Nucl Med 1999; 24:15–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Vogel CL, Schoenfelder J, Shemano I, Hayes DF, Gams RA. Worsening bone scan in the evaluation of antitumor response during hormonal therapy of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13:1123–1128.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Cook GJ, Fogelman I. The role of nuclear medicine in monitoring treatment in skeletal malignancy. Semin Nucl Med 2001; 31:206–211.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Ospedale “A. Manzoni”, Via dell’Eremo 9/11, 23900, Lecco, Italy

    Lorenzo Maffioli, Luigia Florimonte, Luca Pagani & Ivana Butti

  2. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Hospital Universitari Vall Hebron, 08035, Barcelona, Spain

    Isabel Roca

Authors
  1. Lorenzo Maffioli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Luigia Florimonte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luca Pagani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ivana Butti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Isabel Roca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorenzo Maffioli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Maffioli, L., Florimonte, L., Pagani, L. et al. Current role of bone scan with phosphonates in the follow-up of breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31 (Suppl 1), S143–S148 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1537-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1537-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation