The Significance of Bone Scintigraphy in the Evaluation of Metastatic Disease Before and After Therapy in a Patient with Prostate Cancer: a Case Report and a Review of Literature

Case report

Milica Kotur, Lenka Grujičić, Nikola Pantić, Miroslava Blagić, Dragana Šobić Šaranović, Vera Artiko

144–148

https://doi.org/10.5937/medrec2404144K

Abstract

Prostate cancer (PC) typically leads to osteoblastic metastases, primarily affecting the axial skeleton and subsequently the femur and humerus. We present a case in which the patient underwent bone scintigraphy (BS) following the diagnosis of PC—initially before the application of therapy due to suspicion of bone metastases and then a follow-up BS after therapy to evaluate treatment efficacy. A 69-year-old male patient underwent initial BS in October 2017. The scintigraphy results revealed multiple areas of asymmetrically increased radiopharmaceutical accumulation in the bones of the head, right clavicle, sternum, several ribs, the thoracic spine, all bones of the pelvis bilaterally, and the right femur. The BS conclusion indicated that the described lesions in the skeletal system were consistent with metastases originating from the previously diagnosed PC. In October 2021, the patient underwent a follow-up BS, after the applied therapy. Compared to the previous scintigraphic findings from 2017, the pathological process had shown complete regression within the skeletal system. No signs of bone metastases were detected. The presented case underscores the pivotal role of BS in detecting skeletal metastases and evaluating patients with confirmed metastases. The initial BS, in conjunction with other diagnostic methods, facilitated the selection of appropriate therapeutic modalities. Conversely, follow-up BS enabled the evaluation of treatment efficacy, and with a low prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level in the blood, the decision was made to discontinue therapy.

Key words: prostate cancer, osteoblastic metastases, bone scintigraphy, androgen deprivation therapy

Ful text 

Literatura

  1. Union E. Prostate cancer burden in EU-27 [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2025 Mar 2]. Available from: https://ecis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2023-12/prostate_cancer_En-Nov_2021.pdf 
  2. Virtanen V, Paunu K, Ahlskog JK, Varnai R, Sipeky C, Sundvall M. PARP inhibitors in prostate cancer—The preclinical rationale and current clinical development. Genes 2019;10(8):565.
  3. National Cancer Institute. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test [Internet]. [cited 2025 Mar 2]. Available from: https://www.cancer.gov/types/prostate/psa-fact-sheet
  4. Koopman AGMM, Jenniskens SFM, Fütterer JJ. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Assessment After Therapy in Prostate Cancer. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2020;29(1):47-58.
  5. Jayarangaiah A, Kemp AK, Theetha Kariyanna P. Bone metastasis. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jul 31 [cited 2025 Mar 5]
  6. Montilla-Soler JL, Makanji R. Skeletal Scintigraphy. Cancer Control 2017;24(2):137-46.
  7. Ghosh P. The role of SPECT/CT in skeletal malignancies. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2014;18(2):175-93.
  8. Prostate Cancer Foundation. Choosing a treatment option [Internet]. Prostate Cancer Foundation. [cited 2025 Mar 6]. Available from: https://www.pcf.org/about-prostate-cancer/prostate-cancer-treatment/choosing-treatment-option/
  9. Rodríguez-Fraile M, Tamayo Alonso P, Rosales JJ, de Arcocha-Torres M, Caresia-Aróztegui AP, Cózar-Santiago M, et al. The role of PSMA radioligands in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate carcinoma. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol (Engl Ed) 2022;41(2):126-135.
  10. Gjyrezi A, Xie F, Voznesensky O, Khanna P, Calagua C, Bai Y, et al. Taxane resistance in prostate cancer is mediated by decreased drug-target engagement. J Clin Invest 2020;130(6):3287-98.
  11. Sartor O, de Bono J, Chi KN, Fizazi K, Herrmann K, Rahbar K, et al. Lutetium-177-PSMA-617 for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2021;385(12):1091-103.
  12. Davila D, Antoniou A, Chaudhry MA. Evaluation of osseous metastasis in bone scintigraphy [published correction appears in Semin Nucl Med. 2015;45(3):266]. Semin Nucl Med 2015;45(1):3-15.
  13. American Cancer Society. Bone metastasis [Internet]. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2023 [cited 2025 Mar 10]. Available from: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/managing-cancer/advanced-cancer/bone-metastases.html
  14. Osguthorpe DJ, Hagler AT. Mechanism of androgen receptor antagonism by bicalutamide in the treatment of prostate cancer. Biochemistry 2011;50(19):4105-13.
  15. Du Q, Jiang G, Li S, Liu Y, Huang Z. Docetaxel increases the risk of severe infections in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Oncoscience 2018;5(7-8):220-38.
  16. Sathianathen NJ, Koschel S, Thangasamy IA, Teh J, Alghazo O, Butcher G, et al. Indirect comparisons of efficacy between combination approaches in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur Urol 2020;77(3):365-72.
  17. Ishibashi Y, Okamura Y, Otsuka H, Nishizawa K, Sasaki T, Toh S. Comparison of scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging for stress injuries of bone. Clin J Sport Med 2002;12(2):79-84.
  18. Wu Q, Yang R, Zhou F, Hu Y. Comparison of whole-body MRI and skeletal scintigraphy for detection of bone metastatic tumors: a meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2013;22(4):261-6.