ОБЗОР МЕТОДОВ ВИЗУАЛИЗАЦИИ ДЛЯ ОЦЕНКИ ОТВЕТА НА ЛЕЧЕНИЕ МЕТАСТАЗОВ В КОСТИ ПРИ РАКЕ ПРЕДСТАТЕЛЬНОЙ ЖЕЛЕЗЫ И МОЛОЧНОЙ ЖЕЛЕЗЫ
Обзорная статья
Дата публикации: декабря 6, 2022
Ключевые слова
метастазы
рак
предстательная железа
рак
предстательная железа
Как цитировать
[1]
Е. А. Николаева, Е. В. Тарачкова, Ж. В. Шейх, А. П. Дунаев, и И. Е. Тюрин, ОБЗОР МЕТОДОВ ВИЗУАЛИЗАЦИИ ДЛЯ ОЦЕНКИ ОТВЕТА НА ЛЕЧЕНИЕ МЕТАСТАЗОВ В КОСТИ ПРИ РАКЕ ПРЕДСТАТЕЛЬНОЙ ЖЕЛЕЗЫ И МОЛОЧНОЙ ЖЕЛЕЗЫ, КМКВ, вып. 3, сс. 107-114, дек. 2022.
Аннотация
Костные метастазы являются крайне частыми осложнениями, связанными с некоторыми видами рака, часто негативно влияющими на качество жизни и функциональное состояние пациентов, поэтому раннее выявление необходимо для проведения немедленных лечебных мероприятий, позволяющих снизить риск скелетных осложнений, улучшить выживаемость и качество жизни. Не существует консенсуса или универсального стандартного подхода для выявления метастазов в костях у онкологических больных, основанного на результатах визуализации. Представлен обзор текущего понимания биологических механизмов, посредством которых опухоли распространяются на кость, и описание методов визуализации, доступных для диагностики метастазов в кости и мониторинга их ответа на онкологическое лечение, уделено особое внимание пациентам с раком молочной железы и простаты. Согласно имеющимся в настоящее время данным, возможно использование методов визуализации следующего поколения, включая диффузионно-взвешенную МРТ всего тела, ПЭТ/КТ и ПЭТ/МРТ с новыми радиофармацевтическими препаратами вместо классической комбинации КТ и сцинтиграфии костей.Литература
1. Coleman R.E. Clinical features of metastatic bone disease and risk of skeletal morbidity //Clin Cancer Res. – 2006. – V. 12. – P. 6243-6249.
2. Amelot A. et al. Spine metastasis in patients with prostate cancer: survival prognosis assessment. //Prostate. – 2021. - V. 81. – P. 91-101.
3. Jemal A. et al. Cancer statistics, 2010. //CA Cancer J Clin. – 2010. – V. 60. – P. 277-300.
4. Reddington J.A. et al. Imaging characteristic analysis of metastatic spine lesions from breast, prostate, lung, and renal cell carcinomas for surgical planning: osteolytic versus osteoblastic. //Surg Neurol Int. – 2016. – V. 7. – P. S361-5.
5. Kawai A.T. et al. Incidence of skeletal-related events in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: an observational retrospective cohort study in the US. //Prostate Cancer. – 2019. – P. 5971615.
6. Hong S. et al. Bone metastasis and skeletal-related events in patients with solid cancer: a Korean nationwide health insurance database study. //PLoS ONE. – 2020. – V. 15. – P. e0234927.
7. Roodman G.D. Mechanisms of bone metastasis. //N Engl J Med. – 2004. – V. 350. – P. 1655-64.
8. Smerage J.B. et al. Circulating tumor cells and response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: SWOG S0500. //J Clin Oncol. – 2014. – V. 32. – P. 3483-9.
9. Schellhammer P.F. et al. Lower baseline prostate-specific antigen is associated with a greater overall survival benefit from sipuleucel- T in the Immunotherapy for Prostate Adenocarcinoma Treatment (IMPACT) trial. //Urology. – 2013. – V. 81. – P. 1297-302.
10. Ryan C.J. et al. Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy. //N Engl J Med. – 2013. – V. 368. – P. 138-48.
11. Crawford E.D. et al. Challenges and recommendations for early identification of metastatic disease in prostate cancer. //Urology. – 2014. – V. 83. – P. 664-9.
12. Tosoian J.J. et al. Oligometastatic prostate cancer: definitions, clinical outcomes, and treatment considerations. //Nat Rev Urol. – 2017. – V.14. – P. 15-25.
13. Trovo M. et al. Radical radiation therapy for oligometastatic breast cancer P. results of a prospective phase II trial. //Radiother Oncol. 2018. – V.126. – P. 177-80.
14. Palma D.A. et al. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for the comprehensive treatment of oligometastatic cancers: long-term results of the SABR-COMET phase II randomized trial. //J Clin Oncol. – 2020. – V.38. – P. 2830-8.
15. Lattouf J.B., Saad F. Preservation of bone health in prostate cancer. //Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. - 2007. – V.1. - P. 192-7.
16. Hillengass J. et al. International myeloma working group consensus recommendations on imaging in monoclonal plasma cell disorders. //Lancet Oncol. – 2019. – V.20. – P. e302-12.
17. Petralia G. et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) in oncology: recommendations and key uses. //Radiol Med. – 2019. – V.124. – P. 218- 33.
18. Padhani A.R. et al. Rationale for modernising imaging in advanced prostate cancer. //Eur Urol Focus. – 2017. – V.3. – P. 223-39.
19. Bruckmann N.M. et al. Prospective comparison of CT and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in N and M staging of primary breast cancer patients: initial results. //PLoS ONE. – 2021.
20. Choi J., Raghavan M. Diagnostic imaging and image-guided therapy of skeletal metastases. //Cancer Control J Moffitt Cancer Cent. – 2012. – V.19. – P. 102-12.
21. von Moos R. et al. Initiation of bone-targeted agents in patients with bone metastases and breast or castrate-resistant prostate cancer actively treated in routine clinical practice in Europe. //Bone. – 2022. – V.154. – P. 116243.
22. O’Sullivan G.J., Carty F.L., Cronin C.G. Imaging of bone metastasis: an update. //World J Radiol. – 2015. – V.7. – P. 202-11.
23. Perez-Lopez R. et al. Imaging diagnosis and follow-up of advanced prostate cancer P. clinical perspectives and state of the art. //Radiology. – 2019. – V.292. – P. 273-86.
24. Allan A.L. et al. Tumor dormancy and cancer stem cells: implications for the biology and treatment of breast cancer metastasis. //Breast Dis. – 2006. – V.26. – P. 87-98.
25. Santini D. et al. New molecular targets in bone metastases. //Cancer Treat Rev. – 2010. – V.36(Suppl 3). – P. S6-10.
26. Lipton A., Goessl C. Clinical development of anti-RANKL therapies for treatment and prevention of bone metastasis. //Bone. – 2011. – V.48. – P. 96-9.
27. Even-Sapir E. Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. //J Nucl Med. – 2005. – V.46. – P. 1356-67.
28. Padhani A.R. et al. Therapy monitoring of skeletal metastases with whole-body diffusion MRI. //J Magn Reson Imaging. – 2014. – V.39. – P. 1049-78.
29. Rybak L.D., Rosenthal D.I. Radiological imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastases. //Q J Nucl Med. – 2001. – V.45. – P. 53-64.
30. Karnholz R., Sze G. Current imaging in spinal metastatic disease. //Semin Oncol. – 1991. – V.18. – P. 158-69.
31. Yang H.L. et al. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing (18)FDG-PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. //Eur Radiol. – 2011. – V.21. – P. 2604-17.
32. Lee Y.H. et al. Spectral parametric segmentation of contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT to detect bone metastasis: feasibility sensitivity study using whole-body bone scintigraphy. //Acta Radiol. – 2015. – V.56. – P. 458-64.
33. Buus T.W. et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced CT, dual-layer detector spectral CT, and whole-body MRI in suspected metastatic breast cancer P. a prospective diagnostic accuracy study. //Eur Radiol. – 2021. – V.31. – P. 8838- 49.
34. Luna A., Vilanova J.C., Alcala M.L. Total body MRI in early detection of bone metastasis and its indication in comparison to bone scan and other imaging techniques. //Arch Esp Urol. – 2015. – V.68. – P. 371-90.
35. Vilanova J.C. et al. Assessment of musculoskeletal malignancies with functional MR imaging. //Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. – 2016. – V.24. – P. 239-59.
36. Vilanova J.C. et al. Update on whole-body MRI in musculoskeletal applications. //Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. – 2019. – V.23. – P. 312-23
37. Sun G. et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging is superior to skeletal scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastatic tumors: a meta-analysis. //Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. – 2020. – V.24. – P. 7240-52.
38. Jambor I. et al. Prospective evaluation of planar bone scintigraphy, SPECT, SPECT/CT, 18F-NaF PET/CT and whole body 1.5T MRI, including DWI, for the detection of bone metastases in high risk breast and prostate cancer patients: SKELETA clinical trial. //Acta Oncol. – 2016. – V.55. – P. 59-67.
39. Shen G. et al. Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. //Skeletal Radiol. – 2014. – V.43. – P. 1503-13
40. Sun. Li M. et al. Diagnostic value of whole-body DWI with background body suppression plus calculation of apparent diffusion coefficient at 3 T versus (18)F-FDG PET/CT for detection of bone metastases. //AJR Am J Roentgenol. – 2020. – V.214. - P. 446-54.
41. Wu L.M. et al. Diagnostic value of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. //J Magn Reson Imaging. - 2011. – V.34. – P. 128-35.
42. Morone M. et al. Whole-body MRI: current applications in oncology. //AJR Am J Roentgenol. - 2017. – V.209. – P. W336-49
43. Mohler J.L. et al. Prostate cancer, version 2.2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. //J Natl Compr Canc Netw. – 2019. – V.17. – P. 479-505.
44. Lecouvet F.E. et al. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion- weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? //Eur Urol. – 2012. – V.62. – P. 68-75.
45. Woolf D.K., Padhani A.R., Makris A. Assessing response to treatment of bone metastases from breast cancer: what should be the standard of care? //Ann Oncol. - 2015. – V.26. – P. 1048-57.
46. Gnanasegaran G. et al. Patterns, variants, artifacts, and pitfalls in conventional radionuclide bone imaging and SPECT/CT. //Semin Nucl Med. – 2009. – V.39. – P. 380-95.
47. Zhang Y. et al. Multiple metastasislike bone lesions in scintigraphic imaging. //J Biomed Biotechnol. - 2012. – V.2012. – P. 957364.
48. Cuccurullo V. et al. Bone metastases radiopharmaceuticals P. an overview. //Curr Radiopharm. – 2013. – V.6. – P. 41-7.
49. Azad G.K., Cook G.J. Multi-technique imaging of bone metastases P. spotlight on PET-CT. //Clin Radiol. – 2016. – V.71. – P. 620-31.
50. Cook G.J.R. PET and PET/CT imaging of skeletal metastases. //Cancer Imaging. - 2010. – V.10. – P. 1-8
51. Torigian D.A. et al. Functional imaging of cancer with emphasis on molecular techniques. //CA Cancer J Clin. – 2007. – V.57. – P. 206-24.
52. Wondergem M. et al. A literature review of 18F-fluoride PET/CT and 18F-choline or 11C-choline PET/CT for detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer. //Nucl Med Commun. – 2013. – V.34. – P. 935-45.
53. Beheshti M. et al. The use of F-18 choline PET in the assessment of bone metastases in prostate cancer: correlation with morphological changes on CT. //Mol Imaging Biol. – 2010. – V.12. – P. 98-107.
54. Garzon J.R.G. et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer. //Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. - 2018. – V.37. – P. 130-8.
55. Hofman M.S. et al. Prostatespecific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. //Lancet. – 2020. – V.395. – P. 1208-16.
56. Cerci J.J. et al. Diagnostic performance and clinical impact of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 imaging in early relapsed prostate cancer after radical therapy: a prospective multicenter study (IAEA-PSMA study). //J Nucl Med. – 2021.
57. Pyka T. et al. Comparison of bone scintigraphy and (68)Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer. //Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. – 2016. – V.43. - P. 2114-21.
58. Costelloe C.M. et al. Imaging bone metastases in breast cancer: techniques and recommendations for diagnosis. //Lancet Oncol. – 2009. – V.10. – P. 606-14.
59. Yu H.H.M., Tsai Y.Y., Hoffe S.E. Overview of diagnosis and management of metastatic disease to bone. //Cancer Control J Moffitt Cancer Cent. – 2012. – V.19. – P. 84-91.
60. Shibata H. et al. Diagnosis and treatment of bone metastasis: comprehensive guideline of the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology, Japanese Orthopedic Association, Japanese Urological Association, and Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology. //ESMO Open. – 2016. – V.1. – P. e000037.
61. Garcia-Saenz J.A. et al. SEOM clinical guidelines in early-stage breast cancer 2015. //Clin Transl Oncol. – 2015. – V.17. – P. 939-45.
62. Cardoso F. et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. //Ann Oncol. – 2019. – V.30. – P. 1674.
63. Cardoso F. et al. 4th ESO-ESMO international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 4)dagger. //Ann Oncol. – 2018. – V.29. – P. 1634-57.
64. Rajarubendra N., Bolton D., Lawrentschuk N. Diagnosis of bone metastases in urological malignancies—an update. //Urology. – 2010. – V.76. – P. 782-90.
65. Keyaerts M. et al. Phase I study of 68Ga-HER2- nanobody for PET/CT assessment of HER2 expression in breast carcinoma. J Nucl Med. – 2016. – V.57. – P. 27-33.
66. Massicano A.V.F., Marquez-Nostra B.V., Lapi S.E. Targeting HER2 in nuclear medicine for imaging and therapy. Mol Imaging. - 2018. – V. 17 P. 1536012117745386.
67. Evangelista L et al. Choline PET or PET/CT and biochemical relapse of prostate cancer P. a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med. – 2013. – V.38. – P. 305-14.
2. Amelot A. et al. Spine metastasis in patients with prostate cancer: survival prognosis assessment. //Prostate. – 2021. - V. 81. – P. 91-101.
3. Jemal A. et al. Cancer statistics, 2010. //CA Cancer J Clin. – 2010. – V. 60. – P. 277-300.
4. Reddington J.A. et al. Imaging characteristic analysis of metastatic spine lesions from breast, prostate, lung, and renal cell carcinomas for surgical planning: osteolytic versus osteoblastic. //Surg Neurol Int. – 2016. – V. 7. – P. S361-5.
5. Kawai A.T. et al. Incidence of skeletal-related events in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: an observational retrospective cohort study in the US. //Prostate Cancer. – 2019. – P. 5971615.
6. Hong S. et al. Bone metastasis and skeletal-related events in patients with solid cancer: a Korean nationwide health insurance database study. //PLoS ONE. – 2020. – V. 15. – P. e0234927.
7. Roodman G.D. Mechanisms of bone metastasis. //N Engl J Med. – 2004. – V. 350. – P. 1655-64.
8. Smerage J.B. et al. Circulating tumor cells and response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer: SWOG S0500. //J Clin Oncol. – 2014. – V. 32. – P. 3483-9.
9. Schellhammer P.F. et al. Lower baseline prostate-specific antigen is associated with a greater overall survival benefit from sipuleucel- T in the Immunotherapy for Prostate Adenocarcinoma Treatment (IMPACT) trial. //Urology. – 2013. – V. 81. – P. 1297-302.
10. Ryan C.J. et al. Abiraterone in metastatic prostate cancer without previous chemotherapy. //N Engl J Med. – 2013. – V. 368. – P. 138-48.
11. Crawford E.D. et al. Challenges and recommendations for early identification of metastatic disease in prostate cancer. //Urology. – 2014. – V. 83. – P. 664-9.
12. Tosoian J.J. et al. Oligometastatic prostate cancer: definitions, clinical outcomes, and treatment considerations. //Nat Rev Urol. – 2017. – V.14. – P. 15-25.
13. Trovo M. et al. Radical radiation therapy for oligometastatic breast cancer P. results of a prospective phase II trial. //Radiother Oncol. 2018. – V.126. – P. 177-80.
14. Palma D.A. et al. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy for the comprehensive treatment of oligometastatic cancers: long-term results of the SABR-COMET phase II randomized trial. //J Clin Oncol. – 2020. – V.38. – P. 2830-8.
15. Lattouf J.B., Saad F. Preservation of bone health in prostate cancer. //Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. - 2007. – V.1. - P. 192-7.
16. Hillengass J. et al. International myeloma working group consensus recommendations on imaging in monoclonal plasma cell disorders. //Lancet Oncol. – 2019. – V.20. – P. e302-12.
17. Petralia G. et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) in oncology: recommendations and key uses. //Radiol Med. – 2019. – V.124. – P. 218- 33.
18. Padhani A.R. et al. Rationale for modernising imaging in advanced prostate cancer. //Eur Urol Focus. – 2017. – V.3. – P. 223-39.
19. Bruckmann N.M. et al. Prospective comparison of CT and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in N and M staging of primary breast cancer patients: initial results. //PLoS ONE. – 2021.
20. Choi J., Raghavan M. Diagnostic imaging and image-guided therapy of skeletal metastases. //Cancer Control J Moffitt Cancer Cent. – 2012. – V.19. – P. 102-12.
21. von Moos R. et al. Initiation of bone-targeted agents in patients with bone metastases and breast or castrate-resistant prostate cancer actively treated in routine clinical practice in Europe. //Bone. – 2022. – V.154. – P. 116243.
22. O’Sullivan G.J., Carty F.L., Cronin C.G. Imaging of bone metastasis: an update. //World J Radiol. – 2015. – V.7. – P. 202-11.
23. Perez-Lopez R. et al. Imaging diagnosis and follow-up of advanced prostate cancer P. clinical perspectives and state of the art. //Radiology. – 2019. – V.292. – P. 273-86.
24. Allan A.L. et al. Tumor dormancy and cancer stem cells: implications for the biology and treatment of breast cancer metastasis. //Breast Dis. – 2006. – V.26. – P. 87-98.
25. Santini D. et al. New molecular targets in bone metastases. //Cancer Treat Rev. – 2010. – V.36(Suppl 3). – P. S6-10.
26. Lipton A., Goessl C. Clinical development of anti-RANKL therapies for treatment and prevention of bone metastasis. //Bone. – 2011. – V.48. – P. 96-9.
27. Even-Sapir E. Imaging of malignant bone involvement by morphologic, scintigraphic, and hybrid modalities. //J Nucl Med. – 2005. – V.46. – P. 1356-67.
28. Padhani A.R. et al. Therapy monitoring of skeletal metastases with whole-body diffusion MRI. //J Magn Reson Imaging. – 2014. – V.39. – P. 1049-78.
29. Rybak L.D., Rosenthal D.I. Radiological imaging for the diagnosis of bone metastases. //Q J Nucl Med. – 2001. – V.45. – P. 53-64.
30. Karnholz R., Sze G. Current imaging in spinal metastatic disease. //Semin Oncol. – 1991. – V.18. – P. 158-69.
31. Yang H.L. et al. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing (18)FDG-PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. //Eur Radiol. – 2011. – V.21. – P. 2604-17.
32. Lee Y.H. et al. Spectral parametric segmentation of contrast-enhanced dual-energy CT to detect bone metastasis: feasibility sensitivity study using whole-body bone scintigraphy. //Acta Radiol. – 2015. – V.56. – P. 458-64.
33. Buus T.W. et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced CT, dual-layer detector spectral CT, and whole-body MRI in suspected metastatic breast cancer P. a prospective diagnostic accuracy study. //Eur Radiol. – 2021. – V.31. – P. 8838- 49.
34. Luna A., Vilanova J.C., Alcala M.L. Total body MRI in early detection of bone metastasis and its indication in comparison to bone scan and other imaging techniques. //Arch Esp Urol. – 2015. – V.68. – P. 371-90.
35. Vilanova J.C. et al. Assessment of musculoskeletal malignancies with functional MR imaging. //Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. – 2016. – V.24. – P. 239-59.
36. Vilanova J.C. et al. Update on whole-body MRI in musculoskeletal applications. //Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. – 2019. – V.23. – P. 312-23
37. Sun G. et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging is superior to skeletal scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastatic tumors: a meta-analysis. //Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. – 2020. – V.24. – P. 7240-52.
38. Jambor I. et al. Prospective evaluation of planar bone scintigraphy, SPECT, SPECT/CT, 18F-NaF PET/CT and whole body 1.5T MRI, including DWI, for the detection of bone metastases in high risk breast and prostate cancer patients: SKELETA clinical trial. //Acta Oncol. – 2016. – V.55. – P. 59-67.
39. Shen G. et al. Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. //Skeletal Radiol. – 2014. – V.43. – P. 1503-13
40. Sun. Li M. et al. Diagnostic value of whole-body DWI with background body suppression plus calculation of apparent diffusion coefficient at 3 T versus (18)F-FDG PET/CT for detection of bone metastases. //AJR Am J Roentgenol. – 2020. – V.214. - P. 446-54.
41. Wu L.M. et al. Diagnostic value of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging for bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. //J Magn Reson Imaging. - 2011. – V.34. – P. 128-35.
42. Morone M. et al. Whole-body MRI: current applications in oncology. //AJR Am J Roentgenol. - 2017. – V.209. – P. W336-49
43. Mohler J.L. et al. Prostate cancer, version 2.2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. //J Natl Compr Canc Netw. – 2019. – V.17. – P. 479-505.
44. Lecouvet F.E. et al. Can whole-body magnetic resonance imaging with diffusion- weighted imaging replace Tc 99m bone scanning and computed tomography for single-step detection of metastases in patients with high-risk prostate cancer? //Eur Urol. – 2012. – V.62. – P. 68-75.
45. Woolf D.K., Padhani A.R., Makris A. Assessing response to treatment of bone metastases from breast cancer: what should be the standard of care? //Ann Oncol. - 2015. – V.26. – P. 1048-57.
46. Gnanasegaran G. et al. Patterns, variants, artifacts, and pitfalls in conventional radionuclide bone imaging and SPECT/CT. //Semin Nucl Med. – 2009. – V.39. – P. 380-95.
47. Zhang Y. et al. Multiple metastasislike bone lesions in scintigraphic imaging. //J Biomed Biotechnol. - 2012. – V.2012. – P. 957364.
48. Cuccurullo V. et al. Bone metastases radiopharmaceuticals P. an overview. //Curr Radiopharm. – 2013. – V.6. – P. 41-7.
49. Azad G.K., Cook G.J. Multi-technique imaging of bone metastases P. spotlight on PET-CT. //Clin Radiol. – 2016. – V.71. – P. 620-31.
50. Cook G.J.R. PET and PET/CT imaging of skeletal metastases. //Cancer Imaging. - 2010. – V.10. – P. 1-8
51. Torigian D.A. et al. Functional imaging of cancer with emphasis on molecular techniques. //CA Cancer J Clin. – 2007. – V.57. – P. 206-24.
52. Wondergem M. et al. A literature review of 18F-fluoride PET/CT and 18F-choline or 11C-choline PET/CT for detection of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer. //Nucl Med Commun. – 2013. – V.34. – P. 935-45.
53. Beheshti M. et al. The use of F-18 choline PET in the assessment of bone metastases in prostate cancer: correlation with morphological changes on CT. //Mol Imaging Biol. – 2010. – V.12. – P. 98-107.
54. Garzon J.R.G. et al. (68)Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer. //Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. - 2018. – V.37. – P. 130-8.
55. Hofman M.S. et al. Prostatespecific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. //Lancet. – 2020. – V.395. – P. 1208-16.
56. Cerci J.J. et al. Diagnostic performance and clinical impact of (68)Ga-PSMA-11 imaging in early relapsed prostate cancer after radical therapy: a prospective multicenter study (IAEA-PSMA study). //J Nucl Med. – 2021.
57. Pyka T. et al. Comparison of bone scintigraphy and (68)Ga-PSMA PET for skeletal staging in prostate cancer. //Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. – 2016. – V.43. - P. 2114-21.
58. Costelloe C.M. et al. Imaging bone metastases in breast cancer: techniques and recommendations for diagnosis. //Lancet Oncol. – 2009. – V.10. – P. 606-14.
59. Yu H.H.M., Tsai Y.Y., Hoffe S.E. Overview of diagnosis and management of metastatic disease to bone. //Cancer Control J Moffitt Cancer Cent. – 2012. – V.19. – P. 84-91.
60. Shibata H. et al. Diagnosis and treatment of bone metastasis: comprehensive guideline of the Japanese Society of Medical Oncology, Japanese Orthopedic Association, Japanese Urological Association, and Japanese Society for Radiation Oncology. //ESMO Open. – 2016. – V.1. – P. e000037.
61. Garcia-Saenz J.A. et al. SEOM clinical guidelines in early-stage breast cancer 2015. //Clin Transl Oncol. – 2015. – V.17. – P. 939-45.
62. Cardoso F. et al. Early breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. //Ann Oncol. – 2019. – V.30. – P. 1674.
63. Cardoso F. et al. 4th ESO-ESMO international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 4)dagger. //Ann Oncol. – 2018. – V.29. – P. 1634-57.
64. Rajarubendra N., Bolton D., Lawrentschuk N. Diagnosis of bone metastases in urological malignancies—an update. //Urology. – 2010. – V.76. – P. 782-90.
65. Keyaerts M. et al. Phase I study of 68Ga-HER2- nanobody for PET/CT assessment of HER2 expression in breast carcinoma. J Nucl Med. – 2016. – V.57. – P. 27-33.
66. Massicano A.V.F., Marquez-Nostra B.V., Lapi S.E. Targeting HER2 in nuclear medicine for imaging and therapy. Mol Imaging. - 2018. – V. 17 P. 1536012117745386.
67. Evangelista L et al. Choline PET or PET/CT and biochemical relapse of prostate cancer P. a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nucl Med. – 2013. – V.38. – P. 305-14.