To evaluate the role of 99mTc-DMSA (V) and [18F]FDG PET-CT in management of patients with osteosarcoma, 22 patients were included in our study. All patients underwent both 99mTc-DMSA (V) and whole-body [18F]FDG PET-CT scans within an interval of 1 week. 555–740？MBq of 99mTc-DMSA (V) was injected i.v. the whole-body planar, SPECT images of primary site and chest were performed after 3-4 hours. [18F]FDG PET-CT images were obtained 60 minutes after i.v. injection of 370？MBq of F-18 FDG. Both FDG PET-CT (mean SUVmax = 7.1) and DMSA (V) scans showed abnormal uptake at primary site in all the 22 patients (100% sensitivity for both). Whole-body PET-CT detected metastasis in 11 pts (lung mets in 10 and lung + bone mets in 1 patient). Whole-body planar DMSA (V) and SPECT detected bone metastasis in one patient, lung mets in 7 patients and LN in 1 patient. HRCT of chest confirmed lung mets in 10 patients and inflammatory lesion in one patient. 7 patients positive for mets on DMSA (V) scan had higher uptake in lung lesions as compared to FDG uptake on PET-CT. Three patients who did not show any DMSA uptake had subcentimeter lung nodule. Resuts of both 99mTc-DMSA (V) (whole-body planar and SPECT imaging) and [18F]FDG PET-CT were comparable in evaluation of primary site lesions and metastatic lesions greater than 1？cm. Though 99mTc-DMSA (V) had higher uptake in the lesions as compared to [18F]FDG PET-CT, the only advantage [18F]FDG PET-CT had was that it could also detect subcentimeter lesions. 1. Introduction OS is a primary malignant bone tumor characterized by the direct formation of immature bone or osteoid tissue by the tumor cells. It is thought to arise from primitive mesenchymal bone-forming cells. The classic OS is a rare (45% of all malignant bone tumors) highly malignant tumor [1, 2], with an estimated incidence of 3 cases/million population/year. OS arises predominantly in the metaphysis of long bones, the most common sites of involvement are femur (42%, 75% of which are distal femur), tibia (19%, 80% of which are proximal tibia), and humerus (10%, 90% of which are proximal humerus). Other significant locations are the skull and jaw (8%) and pelvis (8%). The age at presentation ranges from 10 to 25 years of age. The pretherapeutic diagnostic workup usually involves physical examination, Radiological examination (plain radiograph, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, angiography), radionuclide imaging (bone scintigraphy, 99mTc-DMSA (V), 18F-FDG-PET imaging), biopsy and lab tests. The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of Pentavalent
References
[1]
ACS detailed guide, http://www.cancer.gov/.
[2]
T. R. Harrison, “Oncology and hematology,” in Principles of Internal Medicine, vol. 1, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, USA, 16th edition, 2005.
[3]
A. Jemal, R. Siegel, E. Ward, T. Murray, J. Xu, and M. J. Thun, “Cancer statistics, 2007,” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 43–66, 2007.
[4]
M. Schulte, D. Brecht-Krauss, B. Heymer et al., “Grading of tumors and tumorlike lesions of bone: evaluation by FDG PET,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 1695–1670, 2000.
[5]
A. L. Folpe, R. H. Lyles, J. T. Sprouse, E. U. Conrad, and J. F. Eary, “(F-18) fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a predictor of pathologic grade and other prognostic variables in bone and soft tissue sarcoma,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1279–1287, 2000.
[6]
C. Franzius, J. Sciuk, H. E. Daldrup-Link, H. Jürgens, and O. Schober, “FDG-PET for detection of osseous metastases from malignant primary bone tumours: comparison with bone scintigraphy,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 1305–1311, 2000.
[7]
J. Aoki, H. Watanabe, T. Shinozaki et al., “FDG PET of primary benign and malignant bone tumors: standardized uptake value in 52 lesions,” Radiology, vol. 219, no. 3, pp. 774–777, 2001.
[8]
S. E. M. Clarke, C. R. Lazarus, P. Wright, et al., “Penatvalent DMSA, 131I- MIBG, MDP: an evaluation of three imaging techniques in patients with medullary carcinoma of the thyroid,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 29, pp. 33–38, 1988.
[9]
H. Kobayashi, H. Sakahara, M. Hosono et al., “Soft-tissue tumors: diagnosis with (V) dimercaptosuccinic acid scintigraphy,” Radiology, vol. 190, no. 1, pp. 277–280, 1994.
[10]
A. Zissimopoulos, A. Zanglis, D. Andreopoulos, and N. Baziotis, “The role of (V)-DMSA scan as compared to -MDP and CT scans in imaging the primary tumor and metastases of osteosarcoma,” Hellenic Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 162–164, 2005.
[11]
C. Franzius, H. E. Daldrup-Link, J. Sciuk et al., “FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: Comparison with spiral CT,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 479–486, 2001.
[12]
T. R. Miller, J. W. Wallis, and R. A. Grothe Jr., “Design and use of PET tomographs: the effect of slice spacing,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 1732–1739, 1990.
[13]
M. B. McCarville, R. Christie, N. C. Daw, S. L. Spunt, and S. C. Kaste, “PET/CT in the evaluation of childhood sarcomas,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 184, no. 4, pp. 1293–1304, 2005.
[14]
H. Ohta, K. Endo, t. Fijita, et al., “Clinical evaluation of tumor imaging using (V)DMSA, a new tumor imaging agent,” Nuclear Medicine Communications, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 105–116, 1998.
[15]
A. S. K. Lam, A. G. Kettle, M. J. O'doherty, A. J. Coakley, S. F. Barrington, and P. J. Blower, “Pentavalent -DMSA imaging in patients with bone metastases,” Nuclear Medicine Communications, vol. 18, no. 10, pp. 907–914, 1997.
[16]
S. E. M. Clarke, C. R. Lazarus, P. Wright, et al., “Penatvalent DMSA, 131I- MIBG, MDP: an evaluation of three imaging techniques in patients with medullary carcinoma of the thyroid,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 29, pp. 33–38, 1988.
