Omitting Bone Marrow Sampling in FDG-Avid Rhabdomyosarcoma With 2-[ 18 F]FDG PET-Negative Marrow: Results From an International Retrospective Study

Résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE Detection of bone marrow disease has been a major component of rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) staging with bilateral bone marrow aspirates/biopsies (BMAB) from the iliac crests considered the diagnostic gold standard. This study's goal was to determine if 2- 18 F-labeled fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ([ 18 F]FDG PET/CT) or PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may replace BMAB in RMS staging. METHODS Patients were recruited in Europe and North America. Medical records, FDG PET/CT or FDG PET/MRI (PET), and BMAB reports were collected retrospectively. Images were re-reviewed by nuclear medicine physicians at the patients' home institutions if PET reports indicated increased FDG uptake at bone/bone marrow sites or if tumor cells were detected in bone marrow samples. RESULTS PET imaging and BMAB were performed before chemotherapy and tumor resection in 301 patients with FDG-avid RMS. Bone marrow metastases were detected by PET and BMAB in 54, by PET only in 24, and by BMAB only in one of 301 patients with FDG-avid primary tumors. Absence of bone marrow metastases was confirmed by PET and BMAB in 222 of 301 patients. These observations translated into 98% sensitivity and 90% specificity for PET in detecting bone marrow metastases when BMAB was considered as gold standard. FDG-avid marrow disease was patchy (1-5 foci) in one third of cases. Patients with marrow disease indicated by PET and BMAB had more FDG-avid bone marrow foci, more metastatic sites, and lower survival than those with marrow disease indicated by PET only, suggesting more advanced disease stages. CONCLUSION Bone marrow sampling may be omitted in patients without evidence of FDG-avid bone marrow disease by PET. If there are FDG-avid bone marrow lesions, further investigation by MRI and/or biopsy should be considered.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.