DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING STANDARDS FOR BONE METASTASES
https://doi.org/10.21294/1814-4861-2018-17-1-5-10
Abstract
The purpose of the study was an attempt to create universal criteria for the diagnostic imaging of bone metastases allowing biopsy to be avoided.
Material and methods. Scans from 90 patients with verified primary malignant tumors and focal bone lesions in the (n=278) were analyzed. The minimal size of the focal bone lesion was 1 cm. All patients underwent multiparameter magnetic resonance imaging with a modified scanning protocol and single-photon emission computed tomography combined with computed tomography. Diagnostic evaluation was performed before starting treatment, 1 month after starting therapy, then every 3 months for 1 year.
Results. The original «principle of 8 diagnostic elements» had been created, allowing the assessment of the main pathological conditions and processes occurring in bone structures. Based on the analysis and statistic processing of 236 foci of metastatic lesion, the diagnostic informative value of each of the imaging modalities and the algorithm as a whole were assessed, and the reference values were determined. This approach allowed the accuracy of early diagnosis to be improved due to a more reliable evaluation of bone metastases at an early stage, thus reducing or completely avoiding additional biopsies.
About the Authors
N. I. SergeevRussian Federation
Nikolai I. Sergeev - MD, DSc, Leading Research Associate, Department of New Technologies and Semiotics of Diagnostic Imaging, SPIN-code: 2408-6502. AuthorID: 720796.
86, Profsoyuznaya Str., 117997-Moscow
P. M. Kotlyarov
Russian Federation
Petr M. Kotlyarov, MD, Professor, Head of the Department of New Technologies and Semiotics of Diagnostic Imaging, SPIN-code: 1781-2199. AuthorID: 194339.
86, Profsoyuznaya Str., 117997-Moscow
V. A. Solodkiy
Russian Federation
Vladimir A. Solodkiy - Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor, Director, SPIN-code: 9556-6556. AuthorID: 440543.
86, Profsoyuznaya Str., 117997-Moscow
References
1. Padalkar P., Tow B. Predictors of survival in surgically treated patients of spinal metastasis. Indian J Orthop. 2011 Jul; 45 (4): 307–13. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.82333.
2. Pearce T., Philip S., Brown J., Koh D.M., Burn P.R. Bone metastases from prostate, breast and multiple myeloma: differences in lesion conspicuity at short-tau inversion recovery and diffusion-weighted MRI. Br J Radiol. 2012 Aug; 85 (1016): 1102–6. doi: 10.1259/bjr/30649204.
3. Klaff R., Berglund A., Varenhorst E., Hedlund P.O., Jǿnler M., Sandblom G.; Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group (SPCG) Study No. 5. Clinical characteristics and quality-of-life in patients surviving a decade of prostate cancer with bone metastases. BJU Int. 2016 Jun; 117 (6): 904–13. doi: 10.1111/bju.13190.
4. Wu J.S., Monk G., Clark T., Robinson J., Eigl B.J., Hagen N. Palliative radiotherapy improves pain and reduces functional interference in patients with painful bone metastases: a quality assurance study. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2006 Sep; 18 (7): 539–44.
5. Sergeev N.I., Fomin D.K., Kotlyarov P.M., SolodkiyV.A. Comparative study of the possibilities of spect/ct and magnetic resonance imaging whole body in the diagnosis of bone metastases. Newsletter of RSCRR. 2015; 3: 8. [in Russian]
6. Sergeev N.I. Radiation methods in the diagnosis of metastatic lesions of the bone system. Medical Visualization. 2011; 4: 46–51. [in Russian]
7. Kotlyarov P.M. Multislice computed tomography of the lungs a new stage in the development of radiation diagnosis of lung diseases. Medical Visualization. 2011; 4: 14–20. [in Russian]
8. Grimm L.J., Zhang J., Baker J.A., Soo M.S., Johnson K.S., Mazurowski M.A. Relationships Between MRI Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Lexicon Descriptors and Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes: Internal Enhancement is Associated with Luminal B Subtype. Breast J. 2017 Sep; 23 (5): 579–582. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12799.
9. Borsukov A.V. To be or not to be TI-RADS: polemical notes from the Eurasian forum on thyroid cancer. Endocrine Surgery. 2016; 3: 33–36. [in Russian]
10. Trofimova T.N., Mishenco A.V., Minko B.A., Karlova N.A., Bysko E.A., Gavrilov P.V., Speranskaya A.A. Modern standard analysis of X-ray images. Guidelines for Physicians. St.-Petersburg, 2017. 3–4. [in Russian]
11. Lindenbraten L.D., Korolyuk I.P. Medical radiology (the basis of radiation diagnosis and therapy). Moscow, 2000. 425. [in Russian]
12. Dolgushin M.B., Kotel’nikova T.M., Soboleva O.I., Golanov A.V., Zqyzceva A.Yu., Radkevich L.A., Kornienco V.N. Whole- body examination patients with metastases in the brain: MR-DWI, PET and SPECT/CT. Newsletter of Roentgenology and Radiology. 2009; 4–6: 58–64. [in Russian]
13. Petriev V.M., Tishchenko V.K., Krasikova R.N. 18-F-FDH and other labeled glucose derivatives for use in radionuclide diagnostics of oncological diseases (review). Chemical and Pharmaceutical Journal. 2016; 4: 314. [in Russian]
14. Lapa P., Marques M., Costa G., Lima J.P. The value of quantitative analysis in 18F-NaF PET/CT. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2017 MarApr; 36 (2): 78–84.
15. Aslanidi I.P., Pursanova D.M., Mukhortova O.V., Silchencov A.V., Birukov V.A., Fhirokarad V.I. Diagnosis of recurrence of prostate cancer according to PET/CT with 11C-Holin in patients after radical prostatectomy. Medical Radiology and Radiation Safety. 2015; 60 (5): 50–58. [in Russian]
16. Giovacchini G., Giovannini E., Leoncini R., Riondato M., Ciarmiello A. PET and PET/CT with radiolabeled choline in prostate cancer: a critical reappraisal of 20 years of clinical studies. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017 Sep; 44 (10): 1751–76. doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3700-x.
Review
For citations:
Sergeev N.I., Kotlyarov P.M., Solodkiy V.A. DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING STANDARDS FOR BONE METASTASES. Siberian journal of oncology. 2018;17(1):5-10. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21294/1814-4861-2018-17-1-5-10