SNM Annual Meeting Abstracts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     




J Nucl Med. 2008; 49 (Supplement 1):273P
This Article
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Billhymer, M.
Right arrow Articles by Ghesani, N.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Billhymer, M.
Right arrow Articles by Ghesani, N.

General Clinical Specialties: Operations/Practice Based/Outcomes Research

Operations/Practice Based/Outcomes Research Posters

Utility of PET/CT in evaluation of patients presenting with primary bone lymphoma

Michael Billhymer1, Kathleen Beebe1, Joseph Benevenia1, Francis Patterson1, Lucas Sheen1, Yiyan Liu1, Meera Hameed1, Benjamin Tuy1, Lionel Zuckier1 and Nasrin Ghesani1

1 University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark, New Jersey


Formula

1166

Objectives: This study retrospectively reviewed our experience with PET/CT scanning in patients with primary bone lymphoma. Our hypothesis is that PET/CT scanning is a more accurate staging tool then the commonly performed CT C/A/P. We feel that PET/CT will more accurately determine response to treatment than CT alone.

Methods: A retrospective review of patients diagnosed with primary bone lymphoma with PET/CT performed in the initial staging at our institution was conducted. Included were patients treated between 2003 to present. Sixty-six patients were identified with a histological diagnosis of lymphoma. Of these, nine patients met all inclusion criteria. Retrospective evaluation included the collection of demographic data, clinical and radiographic information, pathology reports, treatment information and follow-up.

Results: The mean age of the group was 52.9 years. Mean follow-up was 18.3 months. Most patients were classified as having diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Initial staging CT C/A/P revealed five patients with stage IE, one with stage II, one with stage IIE, and two patients with stage IV disease. The same group of patients was then staged using PET/CT; one patient had stage IE disease, one had stage II disease and seven patients had stage IV disease. In the seven patients in which mid-treatment PET/CT’s were performed, all patients had significant resolution of previously seen neoplastic processes. Mid-treatment CT C/A/P either failed to show the area of neoplastic focus or showed persistence of the bony lesion.

Conclusions: PET/CT scanning resulted in upstaging in five of the nine patients. It is a more accurate staging tool than CT alone. PET/CT allows for better response assessment and the ability to tailor treatment according to the response.





This Article
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Billhymer, M.
Right arrow Articles by Ghesani, N.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Billhymer, M.
Right arrow Articles by Ghesani, N.