Comparison of integrated whole-body PET/MR and PET/CT: Is PET/MR alternative to PET/CT in routine clinical oncology?

Ishii, Shiro; Shimao, Daisuke; Hara, Takamitsu; Miyajima, Masayuki; Kikuchi, Ken; Takawa, Masashi; Kumamoto, Kensuke; Ito, Hiroshi; Shishido, Fumio

doi:10.1007/s12149-015-1050-y

Cited by 27 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Presently, frequent reports have shown that PET/MRI is useful for diagnosing and staging cancers. Even though PET/CT imaging yields better pulmonary nodule detection [23], PET/MRI performs as well as PET/CT in the diagnosis of head and neck tumors [24], prostate cancer [25], and multiple myeloma [26], and PET/MRI is better than PET/CT imaging in the diagnosis of breast cancer [27], colorectal cancer [28], liver cancer [29], abdominal occasional tumors [30], gynecologic tumors [31], lymphoma [32], and bone [33] and brain metastases [34]. Despite that high-speed MR techniques could overcome some of the limitations of MR in detecting gastric cancer, such as motion artifacts, MR has not yet been widely accepted as a standard imaging method for gastric cancer staging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving MR sequence of 18F-FDG PET/MR for diagnosing and staging gastric Cancer: a comparison study to 18F-FDG PET/CT

Zheng

Liu

et al. 2020

Cancer Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Evaluate the feasibility of fluorine-18 (18 F) fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in patients with gastric cancer by optimizing the scan protocol and to compare the image quality to 18 F FDG PET and computed tomography (CT). Methods: The PET/CT and PET/MR imaging were sequentially performed in 30 patients with gastric cancer diagnosed by gastroscope using a single-injection-with-dual-imaging protocol. After intravenous injection of 18 F-FDG (mean, 249 MBq), PET/CT imaging including low-dose CT was performed (mean uptake time, 47 ± 6 min), and PET/MR imaging including a T1-weighted Dixon sequence for attenuation correction and two different T2-weighted sequences was subsequently acquired (88 ± 15 min after 18 F-FDG injection). Four series of images (CT from PET/CT, T1W, T2W Half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo [T2W-HASTE] and T2W-BLADE from PET/MR) were visually evaluated using a 3-4 points scale for: (1) image artifacts, (2) lesion conspicuity and (3) image fusion quality. The characteristics of the primary lesions were assessed and compared between the PET/CT and PET/MR acquisitions. Results: The image quality and lesion conspicuity of the T2W-HASTE images were significantly improved compared to that of the T2W-BLADE images. A significantly higher number of artifacts were seen in the T2W-HASTE images compared with the T1W and CT images (p < 0. 05). No differences in the accuracy of image fusion between PET/MR and PET/CT (p > 0. 05); however, significant difference was seen in the lesion conspicuity measurements (p < 0.05) with T2W-HASTE being superior. For information about the primary lesion characteristics, the T2W-HASTE images provided the most successful identifications compared with those of the T1W and PET/CT (13vs7vs5) images. Conclusions: PET/MR with the T2W-HASTE was better at revealing the details of local stomach lesions compared with PET/CT imaging. Combining the PET/MR with the T2W-HASTE technique is a promising imaging method for diagnosing and staging gastric cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving MR sequence of 18F-FDG PET/MR for diagnosing and staging gastric Cancer: a comparison study to 18F-FDG PET/CT

Zheng

Liu

et al. 2020

Cancer Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For oncologic imaging, several comparative studies between PET/MRI and PET/CT have been performed within the last couple of years, the majority in smaller-sized patient populations. Depending on the type of cancer investigated, the clinical setting, and the choice of PET radiotracer, these studies have either reported that PET/CT and PET/MRI perform equally well [2–13], or that PET/MRI has minor to moderate advantages [14–21]. It is questionable whether the latter results justify the use of PET/MRI in a routine setting, because the costs for purchase, installation, and maintenance of a PET/MRI system exceed those of PET/CT, and because the scan duration is typically longer with PET/MRI, which leads to a lower patient throughput [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

PET/MRI versus PET/CT in oncology: a prospective single-center study of 330 examinations focusing on implications for patient management and cost considerations

Mayerhoefer

Prosch

Beer

et al. 2019

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposePET/MRI has recently been introduced into clinical practice. We prospectively investigated the clinical impact of PET/MRI compared with PET/CT, in a mixed population of cancer patients, and performed an economic evaluation of PET/MRI.MethodsCancer patients referred for routine staging or follow-up by PET/CT underwent consecutive PET/CT and PET/MRI, using single applications of [18F]FDG, [68Ga]Ga-DOTANOC, or [18F]FDOPA, depending on tumor histology. PET/MRI and PET/CT were rated separately, and lesions were assessed per anatomic region; based on regions, per-examination and per-patient accuracies were determined. A simulated, multidisciplinary team meeting served as reference standard and determined whether differences between PET/CT and PET/MRI affected patient management. The McNemar tests were used to compare accuracies, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for PET/MRI were calculated.ResultsTwo hundred sixty-three patients (330 same-day PET/CT and PET/MRI examinations) were included. PET/MRI was accurate in 319/330 examinations and PET/CT in 277/330 examinations; the respective accuracies of 97.3% and 83.9% differed significantly (P < 0.001). The additional findings on PET/MRI—mainly liver and brain metastases—had implications for patient management in 21/263 patients (8.0%). The per-examination cost was 596.97 EUR for PET/MRI and 405.95 EUR for PET/CT. ICERs for PET/MRI were 14.26 EUR per percent of diagnostic accuracy and 23.88 EUR per percent of correctly managed patients.ConclusionsPET/MRI enables more appropriate management than PET/CT in a nonnegligible fraction of cancer patients. Since the per-examination cost is about 50% higher for PET/MRI than for PET/CT, a histology-based triage of patients to either PET/MRI or PET/CT may be meaningful.

show abstract

“…In the vast majority of these studies, PET/MRI is performed as an add-on imaging session after the clinical and/or standard of care PET/CT is performed (29–31). Ishii et al from Japan compared the diagnostic performance of PET/CT and PET/MRI in 123 patients with a variety of confirmed primary cancers (32). As typical in these types of studies, PET/CT (Biograph mCT, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) was performed first which was then followed by PET/MRI (Biograph mMR, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany).…”

Section: Oncologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Highlights of articles published in annals of nuclear medicine 2016

Jadvar

2017

Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is the first installment of highlights of selected articles published during 2016 in the Annals of Nuclear Medicine, an official peer-reviewed journal of the Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine. A companion article highlighting selected articles published during 2016 in the European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, which is the official peer-reviewed journal of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, will also appear in the Annals Nuclear Medicine. This new initiative by the respective journals will continue as an annual endeavor and is anticipated to not only enhance the scientific collaboration between Europe and Japan but also facilitate global partnership in the field of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging.

show abstract

Comparison of integrated whole-body PET/MR and PET/CT: Is PET/MR alternative to PET/CT in routine clinical oncology?

Abstract: Integrated PET/MR is a feasible whole-body imaging modality and may score better than PET/CT for the detection of brain metastases. To further prove diagnostic utility, this technique requires further clinical validation.

Cited by 27 publications

References 20 publications

Improving MR sequence of 18F-FDG PET/MR for diagnosing and staging gastric Cancer: a comparison study to 18F-FDG PET/CT

Improving MR sequence of 18F-FDG PET/MR for diagnosing and staging gastric Cancer: a comparison study to 18F-FDG PET/CT

PET/MRI versus PET/CT in oncology: a prospective single-center study of 330 examinations focusing on implications for patient management and cost considerations

Highlights of articles published in annals of nuclear medicine 2016

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About