Diagnostic Value of MRI versus <sup>99</sup>Tc<sup>m</sup>-MDP Bone Scan in Osseous Metastasis of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis_Journal of Biomedical Engineering

Authors：

SHENGuohua , ZHOULuyi , JIAZhiyun , ZHANGWenjie , WANGQiao ,  DENGHoufu

Department of Nuclear Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;

Corresponding author：

DENGHoufu, Email: denghfy@126.com

Keywords：

prostate cancer; osseous metastases; magnetic resonance imaging; ⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP bone scan; Meta-analysis

DOI：

10.7507/1001-5515.20140166

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

This paper is aimed to assess the diagnostic value of MRI versus ⁹⁹Tc^m-methylene diphosphonate (⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP) bone scan (BS) for osseous metastases in patients with prostate cancer. The computer-based retrieval was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, EBSCO, Web of Knowledge, the Cochrane Library and Ovid data bases to search for trials about diagnosing osseous metastases of prostate cancer with MRI and ⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP BS. Selected with time acceptance and time exclusion criteria, the data quality were evaluated with QUADAS quality assessment tool and collected. We used the Meta-Disc software to conduct meta-analysis, and then calculated the pooled sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), drew the summary receiving operating characteristic (SROC) curve, and measured the area under curve (AUC) and Q^* value. Then five studies were included, involving 353 patients. The pooled sensitivity of MRI and BS was 0.95 (95% CI 0.90~0.98) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.58~0.75), respectively. The pooled specificity was 0.97 (95% CI 0.94~0.99) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.83~0.91), respectively. The pooled DOR was 402.99 (95% CI 119.05~1 364.15) and 23.85 (95% CI 1.32~431.48), respectively. The AUC was 0.990 1 and 0.624 1, respectively. The Q^* was 0.958 7 and 0.593 8. It can well be concluded that MRI is more effective than ⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP BS in the diagnosis of osseous metastases in patients with prostate cancer.

Citation： SHENGuohua, ZHOULuyi, JIAZhiyun, ZHANGWenjie, WANGQiao, DENGHoufu. Diagnostic Value of MRI versus ⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP Bone Scan in Osseous Metastasis of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis. Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2014, 31(4): 881-887. doi: 10.7507/1001-5515.20140166 Copy

1.	FERLAY J, SHIN H R, BRAY F, et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008[J]. Int J Cancer, 2010, 127(12): 2893-2917.
2.	GALASKO C S B. Skeletal metastases[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1986, (210):18-30.
3.	JACOBSON A F, CRONIN E B, STOMPER P C, et al. Bone scans with one or two new abnormalities in cancer patients with no known metastases: frequency and serial scintigraphic behavior of benign and malignant lesions[J]. Radiology, 1990, 175(1): 229-232.
4.	JACOBSON A F, STOMPER P C, CRONIN E B, et al. Bone scans with one or two new abnormalities in cancer patients with no known metastases: reliability of interpretation of initial correlative radiographs[J]. Radiology, 1990, 174(2): 503-507.
5.	NAKANISHI K, KOBAYASHI M, TAKAHASHI S, et al. Whole body MRI for detecting metastatic bone tumor: comparison with bone scintigrams[J]. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2005, 4(1): 11-17.
6.	ENGELHARD K, HOLLENBACH H P, WOHLFART K, et al. Comparison of whole-body MRI with automatic moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer[J]. Eur Radiol, 2004, 14(1): 99-105.
7.	FRAT A, AGLDERE M, GENOGLU A, et al. Value of whole-body turbo short tau inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging with panoramic table for detecting bone metastases: comparison with ^99MTc-methylene diphosphonate scintigraphy[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2006, 30(1): 151-156.
8.	GHANEM N, KELLY T, ALTEHOEFER C, et al. Whole-body MRI in comparison to skeletal scintigraphy for detection of skeletal metastases in patients with solid tumors[J]. Radiologe, 2004, 44(9): 864-873.
9.	VANDE BERG B V, LECOUVET F E, MICHAUX L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the bone marrow in hematological malignancies[J]. Eur Radiol, 1998, 8(8): 1335-1344.
10.	SCHIRRMEISTER H, GUHLMANN A, ELSNER K, et al. Sensitivity in detecting osseous lesions depends on anatomic localization: planar bone scintigraphy versus 18F PET[J]. J Nucl Med, 1999, 40(10):1623-1629.
11.	TOMBAL B, REZAZADEH A, THERASSE P, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton enables objective measurement of tumor response on prostate cancer bone metastases[J]. Prostate, 2005, 65(2): 178-187.
12.	KOH D M, TAKAHARA T, IMAI Y, et al. Practical aspects of assessing tumors using clinical diffusion-weighted imaging in the body[J]. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2007, 6(4): 211-224.
13.	LOW R N. Abdominal MRI advances in the detection of liver tumours and characterisation[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2007, 8(6): 525-535.
14.	BERLIN J A. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses?[J]. Lancet, 1997, 350: 185-186.
15.	WHITING P, RUTJES A W, REITSMA J B, et al. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews[J]. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2003, 3(1): 25.
16.	WHITING P, WESWOOD M E, RUTJES A W, et al. Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies[J]. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2006, 6(1): 9.
17.	谢纪宝, 陈江涛, 宋兴华. 18F-FDG PET/CT与⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP骨显像诊断肿瘤骨转移价值的Meta分析[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2011, 11(6): 655-660.
18.	LECOUVET F E, EL MOUEDDEN J, COLLETTE L, et al. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer?[J]. Eur Urol, 2012, 62(1): 68-75.
19.	LECOUVET F E, GEUKENS D, STAINIER A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton for detecting bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: diagnostic and cost-effectiveness and comparison with current detection strategies[J]. J Clin Oncol , 2007, 25(22): 3281-3287.
20.	MOSAVI F, JOHANSSON S, SANDBERG D T, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI compared with (18)F-NaF PET/CT for detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate carcinoma[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2012, 199(5): 1114-1120.
21.	VENKITARAMAN R, COOK G J, DEARNALEY D P, et al. Does magnetic resonance imaging of the spine have a role in the staging of prostate cancer?[J]. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol), 2009, 21(1): 39-42.
22.	VENKITARAMAN R, COOK G J, DEARNALEY D P, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of skeletal metastases in patients with prostate cancer[J]. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol, 2009, 53(3): 241-247.
23.	张天嵩, 钟文昭. Meta-DiSc软件在诊断试验Meta分析中的应用[J]. 循证医学, 2008, 8(2): 97-100.
24.	GOSFIELD E, ALAVI A, KNEELAND B. Comparison of radionuclide bone scans and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting spinal metastases[J]. J Nucl Med, 1993, 34(12): 2191-2198.
25.	STEINBORN M M, HEUCK A F, TILING R, et al. Whole-body bone marrow MRI in patients with metastatic disease to the skeletal system[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 1999, 23(1): 123-129.
26.	DWAMENA B A, SONNAD S S, ANGOBALDO J O, et al. Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: mediastinal staging in the 1990s-meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT[J]. Radiol, 1999, 213(2): 530-536.
27.	TRYCIECKY E W, GOTTSCHALK A, LUDEMA K. Oncologic imaging: interactions of nuclear medicine with CT and MRI using the bone scan as a model[J].Semin Nucl Med, 1997,27(2):142-151.
28.	COOK G J, FOGELMAN I. The role of positron emission tomography in the management of bone metastases[J]. Cancer, 2000, 88(12 Suppl): S2927-S2933.
29.	LOEFFLER R K, DISIMONE R N, HOWLAND W J. Limitations of bone scanning in clinical oncology[J]. JAMA, 1975, 234(12): 1228-1232.
30.	李芸芝,马彬,杨克虎,等. MRI和骨扫描对乳腺癌骨转移诊断价值的Meta分析[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2010, 10(10): 1159-11563.

1. FERLAY J, SHIN H R, BRAY F, et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008[J]. Int J Cancer, 2010, 127(12): 2893-2917.
2. GALASKO C S B. Skeletal metastases[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1986, (210):18-30.
3. JACOBSON A F, CRONIN E B, STOMPER P C, et al. Bone scans with one or two new abnormalities in cancer patients with no known metastases: frequency and serial scintigraphic behavior of benign and malignant lesions[J]. Radiology, 1990, 175(1): 229-232.
4. JACOBSON A F, STOMPER P C, CRONIN E B, et al. Bone scans with one or two new abnormalities in cancer patients with no known metastases: reliability of interpretation of initial correlative radiographs[J]. Radiology, 1990, 174(2): 503-507.
5. NAKANISHI K, KOBAYASHI M, TAKAHASHI S, et al. Whole body MRI for detecting metastatic bone tumor: comparison with bone scintigrams[J]. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2005, 4(1): 11-17.
6. ENGELHARD K, HOLLENBACH H P, WOHLFART K, et al. Comparison of whole-body MRI with automatic moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer[J]. Eur Radiol, 2004, 14(1): 99-105.
7. FRAT A, AGLDERE M, GENOGLU A, et al. Value of whole-body turbo short tau inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging with panoramic table for detecting bone metastases: comparison with ^99MTc-methylene diphosphonate scintigraphy[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2006, 30(1): 151-156.
8. GHANEM N, KELLY T, ALTEHOEFER C, et al. Whole-body MRI in comparison to skeletal scintigraphy for detection of skeletal metastases in patients with solid tumors[J]. Radiologe, 2004, 44(9): 864-873.
9. VANDE BERG B V, LECOUVET F E, MICHAUX L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the bone marrow in hematological malignancies[J]. Eur Radiol, 1998, 8(8): 1335-1344.
10. SCHIRRMEISTER H, GUHLMANN A, ELSNER K, et al. Sensitivity in detecting osseous lesions depends on anatomic localization: planar bone scintigraphy versus 18F PET[J]. J Nucl Med, 1999, 40(10):1623-1629.
11. TOMBAL B, REZAZADEH A, THERASSE P, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton enables objective measurement of tumor response on prostate cancer bone metastases[J]. Prostate, 2005, 65(2): 178-187.
12. KOH D M, TAKAHARA T, IMAI Y, et al. Practical aspects of assessing tumors using clinical diffusion-weighted imaging in the body[J]. Magn Reson Med Sci, 2007, 6(4): 211-224.
13. LOW R N. Abdominal MRI advances in the detection of liver tumours and characterisation[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2007, 8(6): 525-535.
14. BERLIN J A. Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses?[J]. Lancet, 1997, 350: 185-186.
15. WHITING P, RUTJES A W, REITSMA J B, et al. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews[J]. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2003, 3(1): 25.
16. WHITING P, WESWOOD M E, RUTJES A W, et al. Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies[J]. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2006, 6(1): 9.
17. 谢纪宝, 陈江涛, 宋兴华. 18F-FDG PET/CT与⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP骨显像诊断肿瘤骨转移价值的Meta分析[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2011, 11(6): 655-660.
18. LECOUVET F E, EL MOUEDDEN J, COLLETTE L, et al. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion-weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer?[J]. Eur Urol, 2012, 62(1): 68-75.
19. LECOUVET F E, GEUKENS D, STAINIER A, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the axial skeleton for detecting bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer: diagnostic and cost-effectiveness and comparison with current detection strategies[J]. J Clin Oncol , 2007, 25(22): 3281-3287.
20. MOSAVI F, JOHANSSON S, SANDBERG D T, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI compared with (18)F-NaF PET/CT for detection of bone metastases in patients with high-risk prostate carcinoma[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2012, 199(5): 1114-1120.
21. VENKITARAMAN R, COOK G J, DEARNALEY D P, et al. Does magnetic resonance imaging of the spine have a role in the staging of prostate cancer?[J]. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol), 2009, 21(1): 39-42.
22. VENKITARAMAN R, COOK G J, DEARNALEY D P, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in the detection of skeletal metastases in patients with prostate cancer[J]. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol, 2009, 53(3): 241-247.
23. 张天嵩, 钟文昭. Meta-DiSc软件在诊断试验Meta分析中的应用[J]. 循证医学, 2008, 8(2): 97-100.
24. GOSFIELD E, ALAVI A, KNEELAND B. Comparison of radionuclide bone scans and magnetic resonance imaging in detecting spinal metastases[J]. J Nucl Med, 1993, 34(12): 2191-2198.
25. STEINBORN M M, HEUCK A F, TILING R, et al. Whole-body bone marrow MRI in patients with metastatic disease to the skeletal system[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 1999, 23(1): 123-129.
26. DWAMENA B A, SONNAD S S, ANGOBALDO J O, et al. Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: mediastinal staging in the 1990s-meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT[J]. Radiol, 1999, 213(2): 530-536.
27. TRYCIECKY E W, GOTTSCHALK A, LUDEMA K. Oncologic imaging: interactions of nuclear medicine with CT and MRI using the bone scan as a model[J].Semin Nucl Med, 1997,27(2):142-151.
28. COOK G J, FOGELMAN I. The role of positron emission tomography in the management of bone metastases[J]. Cancer, 2000, 88(12 Suppl): S2927-S2933.
29. LOEFFLER R K, DISIMONE R N, HOWLAND W J. Limitations of bone scanning in clinical oncology[J]. JAMA, 1975, 234(12): 1228-1232.
30. 李芸芝,马彬,杨克虎,等. MRI和骨扫描对乳腺癌骨转移诊断价值的Meta分析[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2010, 10(10): 1159-11563.

Journal of Biomedical Engineering

Diagnostic Value of MRI versus ⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP Bone Scan in Osseous Metastasis of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content

Journal of Biomedical Engineering

Diagnostic Value of MRI versus 99Tcm-MDP Bone Scan in Osseous Metastasis of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content

Diagnostic Value of MRI versus ⁹⁹Tc^m-MDP Bone Scan in Osseous Metastasis of Prostate Cancer: A Meta-analysis