Skip to main content

Determination of Skeletal Tumor Burden on 18F-Fluoride PET/CT

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sodium Fluoride PET/CT in Clinical Use

Abstract

Since first proposed in 1999 by Larson et al. [1], the use of volumetric quantification techniques on PET/CT exams has become increasingly popular to evaluate tumor burden, especially with 18F-FDG. The volumetric quantification of tumor burden has been shown to correlate with prognosis and is also an objective means to evaluate response to treatment in a variety of cancers [2].

Skeletal tumor burden (FTV and TFL) is obtained by volumetric quantification of 18F-fluoride PET/CT studies and could be used as an imaging biomarker for evaluation of prognosis and response to therapy for many cancers. FTV and TFL can be measured manually or semiautomatically. We will demonstrate the step-by-step quantification process both manually and semi-automatically.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging. The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging. 1999;2:159–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rahim MK, Kim SE, So H, et al. Recent trends in PET image interpretations using volumetric and texture-based quantification methods in nuclear oncology. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;48:1–15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Etchebehere EC, Araujo JC, Fox PS, Swanston NM, Macapinlac HA, Rohren EM. Prognostic factors in patients treated with 223Ra: the role of skeletal tumor burden on baseline 18F-fluoride PET/CT in predicting overall survival. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1177–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Etchebehere EC, Araujo JC, Milton DR, et al. Skeletal tumor burden on baseline 18F-fluoride PET/CT predicts bone marrow failure after 223Ra therapy. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;41:268–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wassberg C, Lubberink M, Sörensen J, Johansson S. Repeatability of quantitative parameters of 18F-fluoride PET/CT and biochemical tumour and specific bone remodelling markers in prostate cancer bone metastases. EJNMMI Res. 2017;7:42.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brito AE, Santos A, Sasse AD, et al. 18F-Fluoride PET/CT tumor burden quantification predicts survival in breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;8:36001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brito AET, Mourato F, Santos A, Mosci C, Ramos C, Etchebehere E. Validation of the semi-automatic quantification of 18F-fluoride PET/CT whole-body skeletal tumor burden. J Nucl Med Technol. 2018;46:378.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lapa P, Marques M, Costa G, Iagaru A, Pedroso de Lima J. Assessment of skeletal tumour burden on 18F-NaF PET/CT using a new quantitative method. Nucl Med Commun. 2017;38:325–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Oldan J, Hawkins A, Chin B. 18F sodium fluoride PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer: quantification of normal tissues, benign degenerative lesions, and malignant lesions. World J Nucl Med. 2016;15:102.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Sabbah N, Jackson T, Mosci C, et al. 18F-sodium fluoride PET/CT in oncology. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40:e228–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJG, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;42:328–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Rohren EM, Etchebehere EC, Araujo JC, et al. Determination of skeletal tumor burden on 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1507–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lin C, Bradshaw T, Perk T, et al. Repeatability of quantitative 18F-NaF PET: a multicenter study. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:1872–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Taghanaki SA, Duggan N, Ma H, et al. Segmentation-free direct tumor volume and metabolic activity estimation from PET scans. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2017;63:52–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Win AZ, Aparici CM. Factors affecting uptake of NaF-18 by the normal skeleton. J Clin Med Res. 2014;6:435.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Oldan JD, Turkington TG, Choudhury K, Chin BB. Quantitative differences in [(18)F] NaF PET/CT: TOF versus non-TOF measurements. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;5:504–14.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Win AZ, Aparici CM. Normal SUV values measured from NaF18- PET/CT bone scan studies. PLoS One. 2014;9:e108429.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Brito, A.E., Etchebehere, E. (2020). Determination of Skeletal Tumor Burden on 18F-Fluoride PET/CT. In: Kairemo, K., Macapinlac, H.A. (eds) Sodium Fluoride PET/CT in Clinical Use. Clinicians’ Guides to Radionuclide Hybrid Imaging(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23577-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23577-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-23576-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-23577-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics