Table of Contents
International Journal of Molecular Imaging
Volume 2012, Article ID 870301, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/870301
Review Article

The Role of Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Assessing the Response to Neoadjuvant Treatment in Patients with Osteosarcoma

1Department of Bioimaging and Radiological Sciences, Institute of Nuclear Medicine, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Largo Gemelli 8, 00168 Rome, Italy
2Institute of Biochemistry and Clinical Biochemistry, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy

Received 28 June 2012; Revised 25 July 2012; Accepted 17 August 2012

Academic Editor: Adriaan A. Lammertsma

Copyright © 2012 Carmelo Caldarella et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. L. Mirabello, R. J. Troisi, and S. A. Savage, “Osteosarcoma incidence and survival rates from 1973 to 2004: data from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program,” Cancer, vol. 115, no. 7, pp. 1531–1543, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. J. Ritter and S. S. Bielack, “Osteosarcoma,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 21, supplement 7, pp. vii320–vii325, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. C. A. S. Arndt and W. M. Crist, “Common musculoskeletal tumors of childhood and adolescence,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 341, no. 5, pp. 342–352, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. S. S. Bielack, B. Kempf-Bielack, G. Delling et al., “Prognostic factors in high-grade osteosarcoma of the extremities or trunk: an analysis of 1,702 patients treated on neoadjuvant cooperative osteosarcoma study group protocols,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 776–790, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. S. Bielack, H. Jürgens, G. Jundt et al., “Osteosarcoma: the COSS experience,” Cancer Treatment and Research, vol. 152, pp. 289–308, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. G. Bacci, M. Rocca, M. Salone et al., “High grade osteosarcoma of the extremities with lung metastases at presentation: treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and simultaneous resection of primary and metastatic lesions,” Journal of Surgical Oncology, vol. 98, no. 6, pp. 415–420, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. S. S. Bielack, D. Carrle, J. Hardes, A. Schuck, and M. Paulussen, “Bone tumors in adolescents and young adults,” Current Treatment Options in Oncology, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 67–80, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. P. J. Messerschmitt, R. M. Garcia, F. W. Abdul-Karim, E. M. Greenfield, and P. J. Getty, “Osteosarcoma,” Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 515–527, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. L. Kager, A. Zoubek, U. Pötschger et al., “Primary metastatic osteosarcoma: presentation and outcome of patients treated on neoadjuvant Cooperative Osteosarcoma Study Group protocols,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 2011–2018, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. J. Posthumadeboer, M. A. Witlox, G. J. L. Kaspers, and B. J. van Royen, “Molecular alterations as target for therapy in metastatic osteosarcoma: a review of literature,” Clinical and Experimental Metastasis, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 493–503, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. D. H. Kim, S. Y. Kim, H. J. Lee et al., “Assessment of chemotherapy response using FDG-PET in pediatric bone tumors: a single institution experience,” Cancer Research and Treatment, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 170–175, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  12. P. Wuisman and W. F. Enneking, “Prognosis for patients who have osteosarcoma with skip metastasis,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery A, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 60–68, 1990. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. A. Lakkaraju, C. N. Patel, K. M. Bradley, and A. F. Scarsbrook, “PET/CT in primary musculoskeletal tumours: a step forward,” European Radiology, vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 2959–2972, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. G. Treglia, E. Cason, and G. Fagioli, “Recent applications of nuclear medicine in diagnostics (I part),” Italian Journal of Medicine, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 84–91, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. G. Treglia, M. Salsano, A. Stefanelli, M. V. Mattoli, A. Giordano, and L. Bonomo, “Diagnostic accuracy of F18 FDG-PET and PET/CT in patients with Ewing sarcoma family tumours: a systematic review and a meta-analysis,” Skeletal Radiology, vol. 41, pp. 249–256, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  16. P. F. Whiting, M. E. Weswood, A. W. S. Rutjes, J. B. Reitsma, P. N. M. Bossuyt, and J. Kleijnen, “Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies,” BMC Medical Research Methodology, vol. 6, article 9, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. D. N. Jones, G. B. McCowage, H. D. Sostman et al., “Monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy response of soft-tissue and musculoskeletal sarcoma using fluorine-18-FDG PET,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 1438–1444, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. M. Schulte, D. Brecht-Krauss, M. Werner et al., “Evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy response of osteogenic sarcoma using FDG PET,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 1637–1643, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. Z. Ye, J. Zhu, M. Tian et al., “Response of osteogenic sarcoma to neoadjuvant therapy: evaluated by F18-FDG-PET,” Annals of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 475–480, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. J. Sato, T. Yanagawa, Y. Dobashi, T. Yamaji, K. Takagishi, and H. Watanabe, “Prognostic significance of F18-FDG uptake in primary osteosarcoma after but not before chemotherapy: a possible association with autocrine motility factor/phosphoglucose isomerase expression,” Clinical and Experimental Metastasis, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 427–435, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. M. R. Benz, V. Evilevitch, M. S. Allen-Auerbach et al., “Treatment monitoring by F18-FDG PET/CT in patients with sarcomas: interobserver variability of quantitative parameters in treatment-induced changes in histopathologically responding and nonresponding tumors,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 49, no. 7, pp. 1038–1046, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. M. R. Benz, J. Czernin, W. D. Tap et al., “FDG-PET/CT imaging predicts histopathologic treatment responses after neoadjuvant therapy in adult primary bone sarcomas,” Sarcoma, vol. 2010, Article ID 143540, 7 pages, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. T. Denecke, P. Hundsdörfer, D. Misch et al., “Assessment of histological response of paediatric bone sarcomas using FDG PET in comparison to morphological volume measurement and standardized MRI parameters,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 37, no. 10, pp. 1842–1853, 2010. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. U. Tateishi, A. Kawai, H. Chuman et al., “PET/CT allows stratification of responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for high-grade sarcoma: a prospective study,” Clinical Nuclear Medicine, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 526–532, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. Bajpai, R. Kumar, V. Sreenivas et al., “Prediction of chemotherapy response by PET-CT in osteosarcoma: correlation with histologic necrosis,” Journal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. e271–e278, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  26. H. J. Im, T. S. Kim, S. Y. Park et al., “Prediction of tumour necrosis fractions using metabolic and volumetric F18-FDG PET/CT indices, after one course and at the completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in children and young adults with osteosarcoma,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 39–49, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  27. N. Nair, A. Ali, A. A. Green et al., “Response of osteosarcoma to chemotherapy: evaluation with F-18 FDG-PET scans,” Clinical Positron Imaging, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 79–83, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. C. Franzius, J. Sciuk, C. Brinkschmidt, H. Jürgens, and O. Schober, “Evaluation of chemotherapy response in primary bone tumors with F-18 FDG positron emission tomography compared with histologically assessed tumor necrosis,” Clinical Nuclear Medicine, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 874–881, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. D. S. Hawkins, J. G. Rajendran, E. U. Conrad, J. D. Bruckner, and J. F. Eary, “Evaluation of chemotherapy response in pediatric bone sarcomas by [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography,” Cancer, vol. 94, no. 12, pp. 3277–3284, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. A. Iagaru, R. Masamed, S. P. Chawla, L. R. Menendez, A. Fedenko, and P. S. Conti, “F-18 FDG PET and PET/CT evaluation of response to chemotherapy in bone and soft tissue sarcomas,” Clinical Nuclear Medicine, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 8–13, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. A. Mahajan, S. Y. Woo, D. G. Kornguth et al., “Multimodality treatment of osteosarcoma: radiation in a high-risk cohort,” Pediatric Blood and Cancer, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 976–982, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. C. M. Costelloe, H. A. Macapinlac, J. E. Madewell et al., “F18-FDG PET/CT as an indicator of progression-free and overall survival in osterosarcoma,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 340–347, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. E. Piperkova, M. Mikhaeil, A. Mousavi et al., “Impact of PET and CT in PET/CT studies for staging and evaluating treatment response in bone and soft tissue sarcomas,” Clinical Nuclear Medicine, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 146–150, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. K. Hamada, Y. Tomita, A. Inoue et al., “Evaluation of chemotherapy response in osteosarcoma with FDG-PET,” Annals of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 89–95, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. D. S. Hawkins, E. U. Conrad, J. E. Butrynski, S. M. Schuetze, and J. F. Eary, “[F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography response is associated with outcome for extremity osteosarcoma in children and young adults,” Cancer, vol. 115, no. 15, pp. 3519–3525, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. L. L. Gaston, C. Di Bella, J. Slavin, R. J. Hicks, and P. F. M. Choong, “F18-FDG PET response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for Ewing sarcoma and osteosarcoma are different,” Skeletal Radiology, vol. 40, no. 8, pp. 1007–1015, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. K. London, C. Stege, S. Cross et al., “F18-FDG PET/CT compared to conventional imaging modalities in pediatric primary bone tumors,” Pediatric Radiology, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 418–430, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  38. M. Salzer Kuntschik, G. Delling, G. Beron, and R. Sigmund, “Morphological grades of regression in osteosarcoma after polychemotherapy: study COSS 80,” Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, vol. 106, supplement, pp. 21–24, 1983. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. H. Zhuang, M. Pourdehnad, E. S. Lambright et al., “Dual time point F18-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 1412–1417, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. Y. Demura, T. Tsuchida, T. Ishizaki et al., “F18-FDG accumulation with PET for differentiation between benign and malignant lesions in the thorax,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 540–548, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. T. Higashi, T. Saga, Y. Nakamoto et al., “Relationship between retention index in dual-phase F18-FDG PET, and hexokinase-II and glucose transporter-1 expression in pancreatic cancer,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 173–180, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus