Comparing the diagnostic efficacy of [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT and [¹⁸F]FDG PET/MRI for detecting bone metastases in breast cancer: a meta-analysis

1. Torre LA, Islami F, Siegel RL, Ward EM, Jemal A. Global cancer in women: burden and trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017; 26: 444–57. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.Epi-16-0858 TorreLA IslamiF SiegelRL WardEM JemalA Global cancer in women: burden and trends Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017 26 444 57 10.1158/1055-9965.Epi-16-0858 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

2. Ahmed A, Glynne-Jones R, Ell PJ. Skeletal scintigraphy in carcinoma of the breast – a ten year retrospective study of 389 patients. Nucl Med Commun 1990; 11: 421–6. doi: 10.1097/00006231-199006000-00004 AhmedA Glynne-JonesR EllPJ Skeletal scintigraphy in carcinoma of the breast – a ten year retrospective study of 389 patients Nucl Med Commun 1990 11 421 6 10.1097/00006231-199006000-00004 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

3. Hortobagyi GN, Theriault RL, Lipton A, Porter L, Blayney D, Sinoff C, et al. Long-term prevention of skeletal complications of metastatic breast cancer with pamidronate. Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 2038–44. doi: 10.1200/jco.1998.16.6.2038 HortobagyiGN TheriaultRL LiptonA PorterL BlayneyD SinoffC Long-term prevention of skeletal complications of metastatic breast cancer with pamidronate. Protocol 19 Aredia Breast Cancer Study Group J Clin Oncol 1998 16 2038 44 10.1200/jco.1998.16.6.2038 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

4. Roberts CC, Daffner RH, Weissman BN, Bancroft L, Bennett DL, Blebea JS, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria on metastatic bone disease. J Am Coll Radiol 2010; 7: 400–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.02.015 RobertsCC DaffnerRH WeissmanBN BancroftL BennettDL BlebeaJS ACR appropriateness criteria on metastatic bone disease J Am Coll Radiol 2010 7 400 9 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.02.015 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

5. Rong J, Wang S, Ding Q, Yun M, Zheng Z, Ye S. Comparison of 18 FDG PET-CT and bone scintigraphy for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer patients. A meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2013; 22: 86–91. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2013.01.002 RongJ WangS DingQ YunM ZhengZ YeS Comparison of 18 FDG PET-CT and bone scintigraphy for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer patients. A meta-analysis Surg Oncol 2013 22 86 91 10.1016/j.suronc.2013.01.002 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

6. Evangelista L, Cuppari L, Burei M, Zorz A, Caumo F. Head-to-head comparison between ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI in breast cancer. Clin Transl Imaging 2019; 7: 99–104. doi: 10.1007/s40336-019-00319-2 EvangelistaL CuppariL BureiM ZorzA CaumoF Head-to-head comparison between ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI in breast cancer Clin Transl Imaging 2019 7 99 104 10.1007/s40336-019-00319-2 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

7. Choi YJ, Shin YD, Kang YH, Lee MS, Lee MK, Cho BS, et al. The Effects of pre-operative (18)F-FDG PET/CT in breast cancer patients in comparison to the conventional imaging Study. J Breast Cancer 2012; 15: 441–8. doi: 10.4048/jbc.2012.15.4.441 ChoiYJ ShinYD KangYH LeeMS LeeMK ChoBS The Effects of pre-operative (18)F-FDG PET/CT in breast cancer patients in comparison to the conventional imaging Study J Breast Cancer 2012 15 441 8 10.4048/jbc.2012.15.4.441 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

8. Evangelista L, Cervino AR, Ghiotto C, Al-Nahhas A, Rubello D, Muzzio PC. Tumor marker-guided PET in breast cancer patients-a recipe for a perfect wedding: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med 2012; 37: 467–74. doi: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e31824850b0 EvangelistaL CervinoAR GhiottoC Al-NahhasA RubelloD MuzzioPC Tumor marker-guided PET in breast cancer patients-a recipe for a perfect wedding: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis Clin Nucl Med 2012 37 467 74 10.1097/RLU.0b013e31824850b0 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

9. Botsikas D, Bagetakos I, Picarra M, Da Cunha Afonso Barisits AC, Boudabbous S, Montet X, et al. What is the diagnostic performance of 18-FDG-PET/MR compared to PET/CT for the N- and M-staging of breast cancer? Eur Radiol 2018; 29: 1787–98. doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5720-8 BotsikasD BagetakosI PicarraM Da Cunha Afonso BarisitsAC BoudabbousS MontetX What is the diagnostic performance of 18-FDG-PET/MR compared to PET/CT for the N- and M-staging of breast cancer? Eur Radiol 2018 29 1787 98 10.1007/s00330-018-5720-8 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

10. Melsaether AN, Raad RA, Pujara AC, Ponzo FD, Pysarenko KM, Jhaveri K, et al. Comparison of whole-body (18)F FDG PET/MR imaging and whole-body (18)F FDG PET/CT in terms of lesion detection and radiation dose in patients with breast cancer. Radiology 2016; 281: 193–202. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016151155 MelsaetherAN RaadRA PujaraAC PonzoFD PysarenkoKM JhaveriK Comparison of whole-body (18)F FDG PET/MR imaging and whole-body (18)F FDG PET/CT in terms of lesion detection and radiation dose in patients with breast cancer Radiology 2016 281 193 202 10.1148/radiol.2016151155 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

11. Sawicki LM, Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Buchbender C, Nagarajah J, Umutlu L, et al. Evaluation of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI, ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and CT in whole-body staging of recurrent breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85: 459–65. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.12.010 SawickiLM GrueneisenJ SchaarschmidtBM BuchbenderC NagarajahJ UmutluL Evaluation of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI, ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and CT in whole-body staging of recurrent breast cancer Eur J Radiol 2016 85 459 65 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.12.010 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

12. McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD, McGrath TA, Bossuyt PM, Clifford T, et al. Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. Jama 2018; 319: 388–96. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.19163 McInnesMDF MoherD ThombsBD McGrathTA BossuytPM CliffordT Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement Jama 2018 319 388 96 10.1001/jama.2017.19163 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

13. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155: 529–36. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 WhitingPF RutjesAW WestwoodME MallettS DeeksJJ ReitsmaJB QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies Ann Intern Med 2011 155 529 36 10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

14. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002; 21: 1539–58. doi: 10.1002/sim.1186 HigginsJP ThompsonSG Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis Stat Med 2002 21 1539 58 10.1002/sim.1186 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

15. Catalano OA, Nicolai E, Rosen BR, Luongo A, Catalano M, Iannace C, et al. Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer 2015; 112: 1452–60. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2015.112 CatalanoOA NicolaiE RosenBR LuongoA CatalanoM IannaceC Comparison of CE-FDG-PET/CT with CE-FDG-PET/MR in the evaluation of osseous metastases in breast cancer patients Br J Cancer 2015 112 1452 60 10.1038/bjc.2015.112 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

16. Bruckmann NM, Kirchner J, Umutlu L, Fendler WP, Seifert R, Herrmann K, et al. Prospective comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI, MRI, CT, and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in the initial staging of primary breast cancer patients. Eur Radiol 2021; 31: 8714–24. doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07956-0 BruckmannNM KirchnerJ UmutluL FendlerWP SeifertR HerrmannK Prospective comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI, MRI, CT, and bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in the initial staging of primary breast cancer patients Eur Radiol 2021 31 8714 24 10.1007/s00330-021-07956-0 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

17. Balci TA, Koc ZP, Komek H. Bone scan or F-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography; which modality better shows bone metastases of breast cancer? Breast Care 2012; 7: 389–93. doi: 10.1159/000341559 BalciTA KocZP KomekH Bone scan or F-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography; which modality better shows bone metastases of breast cancer? Breast Care 2012 7 389 93 10.1159/000341559 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

18. Hahn S, Heusner T, Kümmel S, Köninger A, Nagarajah J, Müller S, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and bone scintigraphy for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer. Acta Radiol 2011; 52: 1009–14. doi: 10.1258/ar.2011.100507 HahnS HeusnerT KümmelS KöningerA NagarajahJ MüllerS Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and bone scintigraphy for detection of bone metastases in breast cancer Acta Radiol 2011 52 1009 14 10.1258/ar.2011.100507 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

19. Manohar K, Mittal BR, Senthil R, Kashyap R, Bhattacharya A, Singh G. Clinical utility of F-18 FDG PET/CT in recurrent breast carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 2012; 33: 591–6. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283516716 ManoharK MittalBR SenthilR KashyapR BhattacharyaA SinghG Clinical utility of F-18 FDG PET/CT in recurrent breast carcinoma Nucl Med Commun 2012 33 591 6 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283516716 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

20. Demir SS, Aktas GE, Yenici FU. A Lesion based and sub-regional comparison of FDG PET/CT and MDP bone scintigraphy in detection of bone metastasis in breast cancer. Curr Med Imaging 2017; 13: 422–30. doi: 10.2174/1573405613666170126121221 DemirSS AktasGE YeniciFU A Lesion based and sub-regional comparison of FDG PET/CT and MDP bone scintigraphy in detection of bone metastasis in breast cancer Curr Med Imaging 2017 13 422 30 10.2174/1573405613666170126121221 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

21. Niikura N, Hashimoto J, Kazama T, Koizumi J, Ogiya R, Terao M, et al. Diagnostic performance of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT and bone scintigraphy in breast cancer patients with suspected bone metastasis. Breast Cancer 2016; 23: 662–7. doi: 10.1007/s12282-015-0621-z NiikuraN HashimotoJ KazamaT KoizumiJ OgiyaR TeraoM Diagnostic performance of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT and bone scintigraphy in breast cancer patients with suspected bone metastasis Breast Cancer 2016 23 662 7 10.1007/s12282-015-0621-z Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

22. Riegger C, Herrmann J, Nagarajah J, Hecktor J, Kuemmel S, Otterbach F, et al. Whole-body FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for staging primary breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39: 852–63. doi: 10.1007/s00259-012-2077-0 RieggerC HerrmannJ NagarajahJ HecktorJ KuemmelS OtterbachF Whole-body FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for staging primary breast cancer patients Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012 39 852 63 10.1007/s00259-012-2077-0 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

23. Rager O, Lee-Felker SA, Tabouret-Viaud C, Felker ER, Poncet A, Amzalag G, et al. Accuracy of whole-body HDP SPECT/CT, FDG PET/CT, and their combination for detecting bone metastases in breast cancer: an intra-personal comparison. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018; 8: 159–68. PMID: 30042868 RagerO Lee-FelkerSA Tabouret-ViaudC FelkerER PoncetA AmzalagG Accuracy of whole-body HDP SPECT/CT, FDG PET/CT, and their combination for detecting bone metastases in breast cancer: an intra-personal comparison Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018 8 159 68 30042868 Search in Google Scholar

24. Hansen JA, Naghavi-Behzad M, Gerke O, Baun C, Falch K, Duvnjak S, et al. Diagnosis of bone metastases in breast cancer: lesion-based sensitivity of dual-timepoint FDG-PET/CT compared to low-dose CT and bone scintigraphy. PLoS ONE 2021; 16: e0260066. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260066 HansenJA Naghavi-BehzadM GerkeO BaunC FalchK DuvnjakS Diagnosis of bone metastases in breast cancer: lesion-based sensitivity of dual-timepoint FDG-PET/CT compared to low-dose CT and bone scintigraphy PLoS ONE 2021 16 e0260066 10.1371/journal.pone.0260066 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

25. Niikura N, Costelloe CM, Madewell JE, Hayashi N, Yu TK, Liu J, et al. FDG-PET/CT compared with conventional imaging in the detection of distant metastases of primary breast cancer. Oncologist 2011; 16: 1111–9. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0089 NiikuraN CostelloeCM MadewellJE HayashiN YuTK LiuJ FDG-PET/CT compared with conventional imaging in the detection of distant metastases of primary breast cancer Oncologist 2011 16 1111 9 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0089 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

26. Shawky M, Ali ZAE, Hashem DH, Houseni M. Role of positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in breast cancer. Egipt J Radiol Nucl Med 2020; 51: 125. doi: 10.1186/s43055-020-00244-9 ShawkyM AliZAE HashemDH HouseniM Role of positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in breast cancer Egipt J Radiol Nucl Med 2020 51 125 10.1186/s43055-020-00244-9 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

27. Teke F, Teke M, Inal A, Kaplan MA, Kucukoner M, Aksu R, et al. Significance of hormone receptor status in comparison of ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT and ⁹⁹mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy for evaluating bone metastases in patients with breast cancer: single center experience. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2015; 16: 387–91. doi: 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.1.387 TekeF TekeM InalA KaplanMA KucukonerM AksuR Significance of hormone receptor status in comparison of ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT and ⁹⁹mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy for evaluating bone metastases in patients with breast cancer: single center experience Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2015 16 387 91 10.7314/apjcp.2015.16.1.387 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

28. Zhang C, Liang Z, Liu W, Zeng X, Mo Y. Comparison of whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI for distant metastases in patients with malignant tumors: a meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 2023; 23: 37. doi: 10.1186/s12885-022-10493-8 ZhangC LiangZ LiuW ZengX MoY Comparison of whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI for distant metastases in patients with malignant tumors: a meta-analysis BMC Cancer 2023 23 37 10.1186/s12885-022-10493-8 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

29. Wu LM, Gu HY, Zheng J, Xu X, Lin LH, Deng X, et al. Diagnostic value of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011; 34: 128–35. doi: 10.1002/jmri.22608 WuLM GuHY ZhengJ XuX LinLH DengX Diagnostic value of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis J Magn Reson Imaging 2011 34 128 35 10.1002/jmri.22608 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

30. Bruckmann NM, Morawitz J, Fendler WP, Ruckhäberle E, Bittner AK, Giesel FL, et al. A role of PET/MR in breast cancer? Semin Nucl Med 2022; 52: 611–8. doi: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2022.01.003 BruckmannNM MorawitzJ FendlerWP RuckhäberleE BittnerAK GieselFL A role of PET/MR in breast cancer? Semin Nucl Med 2022 52 611 8 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2022.01.003 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

31. Tabouret-Viaud C, Botsikas D, Delattre BM, Mainta I, Amzalag G, Rager O, et al. PET/MR in breast cancer. Semin Nucl Med 2015; 45: 304–21. doi: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2015.03.003 Tabouret-ViaudC BotsikasD DelattreBM MaintaI AmzalagG RagerO PET/MR in breast cancer Semin Nucl Med 2015 45 304 21 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2015.03.003 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

32. Pfannenberg C, Schwenzer N. Whole-body staging of malignant melanoma: advantages, limitations and current importance of PET-CT, whole-body MRI and PET-MRI. Radiologe 2015; 55: 120–6. doi: 10.1007/s00117-014-2762-z PfannenbergC SchwenzerN Whole-body staging of malignant melanoma: advantages, limitations and current importance of PET-CT, whole-body MRI and PET-MRI Radiologe 2015 55 120 6 10.1007/s00117-014-2762-z Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

33. Tunariu N, Blackledge M, Messiou C, Petralia G, Padhani A, Curcean S, et al. What's new for clinical whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) in the 21st century. Br J Radiol 2020; 93: 20200562. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20200562 TunariuN BlackledgeM MessiouC PetraliaG PadhaniA CurceanS What's new for clinical whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) in the 21st century Br J Radiol 2020 93 20200562 10.1259/bjr.20200562 Open DOISearch in Google Scholar