Journal article
111In-pentetreotide versus bone scintigraphy in the detection of bony metastases of neuroblastoma
Nuclear medicine communications, Vol.23(10), pp.983-989
2002
DOI: 10.1097/00006231-200210000-00008
PMID: 12352597
Abstract
Bone scintigraphy (BS) is widely utilized for the assessment of bone metastases (BMs) of neuroblastoma (NB). Since 111In-pentetreotide scintigraphy (PS) has been used to image NB with high sensitivity, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of PS with that of BS for the detection of BMs of NB. Nine patients with NB underwent both PS and BS for staging and/or restaging of their disease. The sensitivity and specificity of both imaging approaches were compared based on the findings of histopathology, other conventional imaging methods and subsequent clinical follow-up. In five of the nine patients, both PS and BS were negative for BMs. Radiographic bone surveys (RBSs) were also negative in these patients, except in one who showed a suspicious tibial lesion, but a computed tomography-guided biopsy failed to show evidence of disease. These patients remained without clinical evidence of BMs after a median duration of more than 15 months (range, 6-19 months). In three of four remaining patients, both PS and BS were positive for BMs, whilst only PS was positive in one patient. Overall, PS showed a greater number of BMs (30 vs. 7) with greater conspicuity compared with BS. The initial experience comparing BS with PS suggests that PS may provide a better assessment of the extent of BMs of NB, and that it may be useful as an adjunct to BS at institutions in which 131I- or 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine is not available, particularly if BS is negative. In patients with similarly positive BS, PS might still provide unique prognostic information beyond that provided by BS. Further studies are therefore warranted.
Details
- Title: Subtitle
- 111In-pentetreotide versus bone scintigraphy in the detection of bony metastases of neuroblastoma
- Creators
- M. E JUWEID - Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United StatesY MENDA - Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United StatesM. S O'DORISIO - Division of Pediatric Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United StatesD BUSHNELL - Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United StatesM BLAKE - Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United StatesM MADSEN - Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United StatesJ JOHNSON - Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United StatesM. M GRAHAM - Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA, United States
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Publication Details
- Nuclear medicine communications, Vol.23(10), pp.983-989
- Publisher
- Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Hagerstown, MD
- DOI
- 10.1097/00006231-200210000-00008
- PMID
- 12352597
- ISSN
- 0143-3636
- Language
- English
- Date published
- 2002
- Academic Unit
- Radiology; Stead Family Department of Pediatrics; Radiation Oncology
- Record Identifier
- 9984046810002771
Metrics
18 Record Views