Agreement of bone metastasis detection between bone scintigraphy and whole body-MRI in hepatocellular carcinoma
Keywords:
Bone metastasis, bone scintigraphy, whole body-MRI, hepatocellular carcinomaAbstract
Background : Bone scintigraphy is generally accepted as the best imaging study for early detection of bone metastases. However, bone metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), unlike other primary tumors, are largely osteolytic in nature and may be poorly visualized by bone scintigraphy (BS). Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become feasible with recent developments, including fast image acquisition. So far, there has been no report of the performance of either imaging tool in the detection of bone metastasis from HCC.
Objective : To study the agreement of bone metastatic detection by bone scintigraphy and whole-body MRI in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.
Methods : A prospective study was carried out in 16 patients with HCC (mean age 54 years, range 41 - 70 years). All patients were assessed for bone metastasis with bone scintigraphy using Tc-99m methylene diphosphonate (MDP) and whole-body MRI (coronal whole body and sagittal spine T1 weighted and short tau inversion recovery sequences). The bone lesions were assessed on each imaging investigation independently. Each patient was categorized into 1 of 4 categories, i.e. positive, probably positive, probably negative and negative. Extra-osseous metastases on MRI were also recorded.
Results : The study showed moderate agreement of bone metastasis detection between bone scintigraphy and whole body-MRI in patients with HCC (kappa = 0.5 with 95% Cl = 0.19 - 0.81). Eight of the 16 patients (50%) were concordantly categorized. Whole body-MRI tended to identify more positive lesions in the spine, pelvis and appendicular skeleton, whereas bone scintigraphy tended to show more positive lesions in the ribs. Whole body-MRI identified extra-osseous metastases in 9 patients (56%), these included the lung, pelvic cavity and intramuscular of the thigh.
Conclusions : There is moderate agreement of bone metastasis detection between bone scintigraphy and whole body-MRI in patients with HCC. MRI tends to detect more lesions and is also useful for extra-osseous metastasis.
Downloads
References
Eriksen M, Mackay J, Schuger N, Gomeshtapah F, Drope J. The Tobacco Atlas. 5th ed. Atlanta, GA: The American Cancer Society, 2015.
Godtfredsen NS, Holst C, Prescott E, Vestbo J, Osler M. Smoking reduction, smoking cessation, and mortality: a 16-year follow-up of 19,732 men and women from The Copenhagen Centre for Prospective Population Studies. Am J Epidemiol 2002;156:994-1001. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwf150
O'Connell KA, Shiffman S. Negative affect smoking and smoking relapse. J Subst Abuse 1988;1:25-33.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3289(88)80005-1
Shiffman S, Paty JA, Gnys M, Kassel JA, Hickcox M. First lapses to smoking: within-subjects analysis of real-time reports. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996;64:366-79. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.64.2.366
Shiffman S, Waters AJ. Negative affect and smoking lapses: a prospective analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol 2004;72:192-201. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.72.2.192
Pomerleau O, Adkins D, Pertschuk M. Predictors of outcome and recidivism in smoking cessation treatment. Addict Behav 1978;3: 65-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4603(78)90028-X
Rausch JL, Nichinson B, Lamke C, Matloff J. Influence of negative affect on smoking cessation treatment outcome: a pilot study. Br J Addict 1990;85:929-33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1990.tb03723.x
Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 1988;54:1063-70.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063
Terracciano A, McCrae RR, Costa PT, Jr. Factorial and construct validity of the Italian Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Eur J Psychol Assess 2003;19:131-41.
https://doi.org/10.1027//1015-5759.19.2.131
Krohne HW, Egloff B, Kohlmann CW, Tausch A. Investigations with a German version of the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Diagnostica 1996;42:139-56.
https://doi.org/10.1037/t49650-000
Hilleras PK, Jorm AF, Herlitz A, Winblad B. Negative and positive affect among the very old: A survey on a sample age 90 years or older. Res Aging 1998;20:593-610.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027598205003
Joiner TE Jr, Sandin B, Chorot P, Lostao L, Marquina G. Development and factor analytic validation of the SPANAS among women in Spain: (more) cross-cultural convergence in the structure of mood. J Pers Assess 1997; 68:600-15. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6803_8
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of crosscultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000 ;25:3186-91.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 1998;2:i-iv, 1-74. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta2140
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Chulalongkorn Medical Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
