• PSMA-PET/CT assessed the presence of bone metastases correctly in all 55 patients • PSMA-PET/CT was more advantageous compared to WB-MRI • No difference was found between PSMA-PET/CT and NaF-PET/CT.

BackgroundFor decades, the most widely used imaging technique for myeloma bone lesions has been a whole-body skeletal X-ray survey (WBXR), but newer promising imaging techniques are evolving.PurposeTo compare WBXR with the advanced imaging techniques 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT), 18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) PET/CT and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) in the detection of myeloma bone lesions.Material and MethodsFourteen patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were prospectively enrolled. In addition to WBXR, all patients underwent FDG-PET/CT, NaF-PET/CT, and WB-MRI. Experienced specialists performed blinded readings based on predefined anatomical regions and diagnostic criteria.ResultsIn a region-based analysis, a two-sided ANOVA test showed that the extent of detected skeletal disease depends on the scanning technique (P < 0.0001). Tukey’s multiple comparison test revealed that WB-MRI on average detects significantly more affected regions than WBXR (P < 0.005), FDG-PET/CT (P < 0.0001), and NaF-PET/CT (P < 0.05). In a patient-based analysis, a Cochran’s Q test showed that there are no significant differences in the proportion of patients with bone disease detected by the different scanning techniques (P = 0.23). Determination of intrareader variability resulted in Kappa coefficients corresponding to moderate (FDG-PET/CT) and substantial agreement (WB-MRI, WBXR, NaF-PET/CT).ConclusionWB-MRI detects on average significantly more body regions indicative of myeloma bone disease compared to WBXR, FDG-PET/CT, and NaF-PET/CT. The lack of significance in the patient-based analysis is most likely due to the small number of study participants.

Background Patient acceptance is an important factor when implementing imaging methods in clinical practice in line with availability, diagnostic accuracy, and cost-effectiveness. Purpose To investigate patient experience and acceptance regarding18F-sodium fluoride (NaF) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), 11 C-choline-PET/CT, whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI), and 99mTc-hydroxymethane diphosphonate (HDP) single photon emission/computed tomography (SPECT/CT). Material and Methods One hundred and forty-nine patients with prostate cancer filled in a questionnaire regarding their experience of the imaging procedures they had been undergoing as part of a diagnostic accuracy study. Each patient had been undergoing a NaF-PET/CT, a WB-MRI, and either a SPECT/CT (group A) or a choline-PET/CT (group B). Results All four imaging methods received overall experience ratings at the favorable end of a 5-point Likert scale with the two PET/CT scans receiving marginally better average ratings (2.0) compared to SPECT/CT (2.2) and WB-MRI (2.3). The arm positioning above the head was the most uncomfortable part of the three nuclear medicine scans, whereas the acoustic noise was the most unpleasant part of the WB-MRI. The experience of staff instruction was relatively strongly correlated to the overall scanning experience of all four imaging modalities. Overall, the patients were willing to repeat the four imaging methods and NaF-PET/CT was the method most preferred in both groups. Conclusion Four imaging procedures were evaluated from the perspective of a selected group of prostate cancer patients. NaF-PET/CT, choline-PET/CT, WB-MRI, and bone SPECT/CT are well accepted imaging methods, and most patients prefer NaF-PET/CT.