Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Nuclear Medicine
Published in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine 2/2015

01-02-2015 | Original Article

Evaluation of a computer-assisted diagnosis system, BONENAVI version 2, for bone scintigraphy in cancer patients in a routine clinical setting

Authors: Mitsuru Koizumi, Kei Wagatsuma, Noriaki Miyaji, Taisuke Murata, Kenta Miwa, Tomohiro Takiguchi, Tomoko Makino, Masamichi Koyama

Published in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine | Issue 2/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate a computer-assisted diagnosis system, BONEVAVI version 2 for bone scintigraphy, this study examined the performance of the software in patients with and without skeletal metastasis.

Methods

Bone scans of various patients were analyzed by BONENAVI version 2. Patients with skeletal metastasis from prostate cancer, lung cancer, breast cancer, and other cancers were included in the study as true positive cases. Patients with normal bone scans, consecutive patients with several days of no skeletal metastasis (regardless of hot spots), and patients with abnormal bone scans but no skeletal metastasis were included as negative cases. Patient artificial neural network (ANN) values equal to or above 0.5 were regarded as positive, and those below 0.5 as negative. This study also analyzed cases according to primary cancer factors, osseous metastasis type, and bone tumor burden.

Results

The sensitivity of patient ANN values was 121/142 (85 %) for all cancers, 25/29 (86 %) for prostate cancer, 35/40 (88 %) for lung cancer, 37/45 (82 %) for breast cancer, and 24/28 (86 %) for other cancers. The specificity of ANN values was 40/49 (82 %) for normal bone scans, 99/122 (81 %) for consecutive patients with several days of no skeletal metastasis, and 44/81 (54 %) for patients with abnormal bone scans but no skeletal metastasis. Patients showing false negatives included: 10 patients with small lesions (6 of whom showed positive lesion ANN values), 4 patients with osteolytic lesions, 5 patients with intertrabecular osseous metastasis, and 1 patient with a metastatic lesion adjacent to the urinary bladder. The correlation between manually counted lesion numbers and Bone Scan Index was excellent for prostate cancer, and was good for lung cancer, breast cancer, and other cancers.

Conclusion

BONENAVI version 2 is an effective computer-assisted diagnosis system for bone scanning, but the drawbacks of bone scanning remain unresolved.
Literature
1.
Imbriaco M, Larson SM, Yeung HW, Mawlawi OR, Erdi Y, Venkatraman ES, et al. A new parameter for measuring metastatic bone involvement by prostate cancer: the bone scan index. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;4:1765–72.PubMed
2.
Sadik M, Jakobsson D, Olofsson F, Ohlsson M, Suurkula M, Edenbrandt L. A new computer-based decision-support system for the interpretation of bone scans. Nucl Med Commun. 2006;27:417–23.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Sadik M, Suurkula M, Hoglund P, Jarund A, Edenbrandt L. Quality of planar whole-body bone scan interpretation—a nationwide survey. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1464–72.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Sadik M, Hamadeh I, Nordblom P, Suurkula M, Hoglund P, Phlsson M, et al. Computer-assisted interpretation of planar whole-body bone scans. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1958–65.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Horikoshi H, Kikuchi A, Onoguchi M, Sjostrand K, Edenbrandt L. Computer-aided diagnosis system for bone scintigrams from Japanese patients: importance of training database. Ann Nucl Med. 2012;26:622–6.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
6.
Nakajima K, Nakajima Y, Horikoshi H, Ueno M, Wakabayashi H, Shiga T, et al. Enhanced diagnostic accuracy of quantitative bone scan using an artificial neural network system: a Japanese multi-center database project. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Res. 2013;3:83 published online.
7.
Ulmert D, Kabateh R, Fox JJ, Savage C, Evans MJ, Lilja H, et al. A novel automated platform for quantifying the extent of skeletal tumour involvement in prostate cancer patients using the bone scan index. Eur Urol. 2012;62:78–84.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
8.
Yamaguchi T, Tamaki K, Yamato M, Honma K, Ueda Y, Saotome K. Intertrabecular pattern of tumors metastatic to bone. Cancer. 1996;78:1384–94.CrossRef
9.
Soloway MS, Hardeman SW, Hickey D, Raymond J, Todd B, Soloway S, et al. Stratification of patients with metastatic prostate cancer based on extent of disease on initial bone scan. Cancer. 1988;61:195–202.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Meirelles GSP, Schoder H, Ravizzini GC, Gonen M, Fox JJ, Humm J, et al. Prognostic value of baseline F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and Tc-99m MDP bone scan in progressing metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16:6093–9.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
11.
Dennis ER, Jia X, Mezheritskiy IS, Stephenson RD, Schoder H, Fox JJ, et al. Bone scan index: a quantitative treatment response biomarker for castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:519–24.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed
12.
Tokuda O, Harada Y, Ohishi Y, Matsunaga N, Edenbrandt L. Investigation of computer-aided diagnosis system for bone scans: a retrospective analysis in 406 patients. Ann Nucl Med. 2014;28:329–39.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Evangelista L, Panunzio A, Polverosi R, Ferretti A, Chondrogiannis S, Pomerri F, et al. Early bone marrow metastasis detection: the additional value of FDG-PET/CT vs. CT imaging. Biomed Pharmacother. 2012;66:448–53.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Pollen JJ, Witztum KF, Ashbum WL. The flare phenomenon on radionuclide bone scan in metastatic prostate cancer. AJR. 1984;142:773–6.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Lemieux J, Guimond J, Laberge F, St-Pierre C, Cormier Y. The bone scan flare phenomenon in non-small-cell lung cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2002;27:486–9.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Koizumi M, Matsumoto S, Takahashi S, Yamashita T, Ogata E. Bone metabolic markers are useful in the diagnosis of bone scan flare phenomenon in bone metastases from breast cancers. Clin Nucl Med. 1999;24:15–20.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of a computer-assisted diagnosis system, BONENAVI version 2, for bone scintigraphy in cancer patients in a routine clinical setting
Authors
Mitsuru Koizumi
Kei Wagatsuma
Noriaki Miyaji
Taisuke Murata
Kenta Miwa
Tomohiro Takiguchi
Tomoko Makino
Masamichi Koyama
Publication date
01-02-2015
Publisher
Springer Japan
Published in
Annals of Nuclear Medicine / Issue 2/2015
Print ISSN: 0914-7187
Electronic ISSN: 1864-6433
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-014-0921-y

Other articles of this Issue 2/2015

Annals of Nuclear Medicine 2/2015 Go to the issue

Original Article

Size measurement of the thyroid gland on a magnified pinhole thyroid scan using an ultrasonic device measuring distance from the pinhole to the thyroid gland

Original Article

The utility of cerebral perfusion SPECT analysis using SPM8, eZIS and vbSEE for the diagnosis of multiple system atrophy-parkinsonism

Original Article

Clinical significance of diffuse hepatic uptake on post-therapeutic early and delayed 131I scan in differentiated thyroid cancer: a preliminary report

Original Article

Cardiac blood pool activity on postablation radioiodine imaging

Acknowledgements to Reviewers

Acknowledgements to Reviewers

Original Article

Investigation of 11C-PiB equivocal PET findings