Bone metastases in thyroid carcinoma: A retrospective analysis

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı diferansiye tiroid kanserli (DTK) hastalarda metastatik kemik hastalığının sonuçlarını değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: 13 yıllık dönemde, DTK’li 596 hasta Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Nükleer Tıp Anabilim Dalı’nda tedavi ve takip edildi. Bu hastalardan kemik metastazı olan 23 hasta (15 kadın %65.2, 8 erkek %34.8; yaş aralığı 26-74 yıl) çalışmaya dahil edildi. 9/23 hasta papiller, 14/23 hasta folliküler tiroid karsinomaydı. Her hastaya toplamda 3.7- 53.65 GBq (100-1450 mCi) I-131 verildi. Takip periyodu 6-132 aydı. Kemik metastazlı hastaların tanı ve takibinde I-131 tüm vücut tarama (TVT), Tc-99m MDP tüm vücut kemik sintigrafisi (TVKS), Tiroglobulin (Tg) düzeyi ve/veya bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT) kullanıldı. Bulgular: Hasta grubumuzda kemik metastazı sıklığı %3.9 (23/596) bulundu. Hastalar kemik metastazının saptandığı döneme göre iki gruba ayrıldı. Grup 1; primer kemik metastazından histopatolojik değerlendirme ile tiroid kanseri tanısı alan 19 hasta ve Grup 2 takipte kemik metastazı saptanan tiroid kanserli 4 hastadan oluşmaktaydı. Hastalar tedavi sonrası 6-132 ay takip edildi. Grup 1’den %42.1 hastada progresif hastalık (PH), %26.3 hastada kısmi yanıt (KY) ve %31.6 hastada stabil hastalık (SH) izlenirken, grup 2’de %75 hastada PH ve %25 hastada SH gözlendi. Her iki gruptaki tüm hastalar için Tg değeri 10 ng.ml-1’den yüksekti (gruplar için ort. Tg değeri sırasıyla 19168 ng.ml-1 ve 3144 ng.ml-1). Sonuç: Takipte kemik metastazı saptanan hastaların prognozu tanı anında veya ablasyon tedavisi sırasında kemik metastazı saptanan hastaların prognozundan daha kötüdür. Kemik metastazı bulunan DTK’da diğer organ metastazlarının sıklığı da yüksektir ve Tg bu hastaların takibinde önemli bir parametredir.

Tiroid kanserinde kemik metastazı: Retrospektif bir analiz

Objective: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the outcome of metastatic bone disease in patients with differantiated thyroid carcinoma (DTC), retrospectively. Material and Methods: During a 13 year period, five hundred ninety six patients with DTC were treated and monitored at Ankara University, Medical Faculty, Department of Nuclear Medicine. Twenty three patients (15 females 65.2%, 8 males 34.8%; age range 26-74) with bone metastases were included in this study. 9/23 patients had papillary, 14/23 patients had follicular thyroid carcinoma. A total of 3.7- 53.65 GBq (100-1450 mCi) I-131 was given to each patient. The follow-up period was from 6 to 132 months. I-131 whole-body scan (WBS), Tc-99m MDP whole-body bone scan (WBBS), the determination of thyroglobulin (Tg) level and/or computed tomography (CT) scan were carried out in the assessment of the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with bone metastases. Results: The frequency of bone metastases were found 3.9 % (23/596) in our analysis. Classification was performed according to the time of diagnosis of bone metastases. In group1, 19 patients were diagnosed as thyroid carcinoma from primary bone metastases with histopathological examination, and in Group 2 in 4 patients with DTC, bone metastases were diagnosed in the follow-up period. Patients were followed 6-132 months after the therapy for bone metastases and in the final examination 42.1% patients had progressive disease (PD), 26.3% patients had partial response (PR) and 31.6% patients had stable disease (SD) in Group 1. 75% patients had PD and 25% patient had SD in Group 2. All patients had Tg levels higher than 10 ng.ml-1 in both groups (mean Tg values 19168 ng.ml-1 and 3144 ng.ml-1 for groups, respectively). Conclusions: The prognosis of patients with metastases at the follow-up was worse than patients with metastases at the initial diagnosis or at the ablation therapy. Tg is an important parameter and the prevalence of the other organ metastases is high in DTC patients with bone metastases.

___

  • 1. Schlum ber ger M, Tu bi a na M, De Vat ha i re F, Hill C, Gad ret P, Tra vag li JP, et al. Long-term re sults of tre at ment of 283 pa ti ents with lung and bo ne me tas ta ses from dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id car ci no ma. J Clin En doc ri nol Me tab 1986;63:960-7.
  • 2. Ru e ge mer JJ, Hay ID, Bergs tralh EJ, Ryan JJ, Of ford KP, Gor man CA. Dis tant me tas ta ses in dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id car ci no ma: a mul ti va ri a - te analy sis of prog nos tic va ri ab les. J Clin Endoc ri nol Me tab 1988;67:501-8.
  • 3. Ho i e J, Sten wig AE, Kull mann G, Lin de gard M. Dis tant me tas ta ses in pa pil lary thyro id cancer. A re vi ew of 91 pa ti ents. Can cer 1988;61: 1-6.
  • 4. McCor mack KR. Bo ne me tas ta ses from thyro id car ci no ma. Can cer 1966;19:181-4.
  • 5. Do MY, Rhe e Y, Kim DJ, Kim CS, Nam KH, Ahn CW, et al. Cli ni cal fe a tu res of bo ne me - tas ta ses re sul ting from thyro id can cer: a re vi - ew of 28 pa ti ents over a 20-ye ar pe ri od. En doc ri ne Jo ur nal 2005;52:701-7.
  • 6. Pet rich T, Wid ja ja A, Mus holt TJ, Hof mann M, Brunk horst T, Eh ren he im C, et al. Out co me af - ter ra di o i o di ne the rapy in 107 pa ti ents with diffe ren ti a ted thyro id car ci no ma and ini ti al bo ne me tas ta ses:si de ef fects and inf lu en ce of age. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:203-8.
  • 7. Pit tas AG, Ad ler M, Faz za ri M, Tic ko o S, Ro - sa i J, LAr son SM, et al. Bo ne me tas ta ses from thyro id car ci no ma: cli ni cal cha rac te ris tics and prog nos tic va ri ab les in one hun dred and fortysix pa ti ents. Thyro id 2000;10:261-8.
  • 8. Ni e der le B, Ro ka R, Schem per M, Fritsch A, We is sel M, Ra mach W. Sur gi cal tre at ment of dis tant me tas ta ses in dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id can cer: in di ca ti on and re sults. Sur gery 1986; 100:1088-97.
  • 9. Ber ni er MO, Le en hardt L, Ho ang C, Au ren go A, Mary JY, Me ne ga ux F, et al. Sur vi val and the ra pe u tic mo da li ti es in pa ti ents with bo ne me tas ta ses of dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id car ci no - mas. J Clin En doc ri nol Me tab 2001;86:1568- 73.
  • 10. Schlum ber ger M, Chal le ton C, De Vat ha i re F, Tra vag li J.P, Gad ret P, Lum bro so J.D, et al. Ra di o ac ti ve io di ne tre at ment and ex ter nal radi ot he rapy for lung and bo ne me tas ta ses from thyro id car ci no ma. J Nucl Med 1996;37:598- 605.
  • 11. Mar coc ci C, Pa ci ni F, Eli se i R, Schi pa ni E, Cec ca rel li C, Mic co li P, et al. Cli ni cal and bi o - lo gic be ha vi or of bo ne me tas ta ses from dif fe - ren ti a ted thyro id car ci no ma. Sur gery 1989; 106:960-6.
  • 12. Pro ye CAG, Dro mer DHR, Car na il le BM, Gonti er AJP, Go ro po u los A, Car pen ti er P, et al. Is it stil worth whi le to tre at bo ne me tas ta ses from dif fe ren ti a ted thyrid car ci o ma with ra di o ac ti ve io di ne? World Jo ur nal of Sur gery 1992;16: 640-6.
  • 13. Schlum ber ger M, Sher man SI. Cli ni cal Tri als for Prog res si ve Dif fe ren ti a ted Thyro id Cancer: Pa ti ent Se lec ti on, Study De sign, and Recent Ad van ces. Thyro id 2009;19(12):1393- 400.
  • 14. Ei sen ha u er EA, The ras se P, Bo ga erts J, Schwartz LH, Sar gent D, Ford R, et al. New res pon se eva lu a ti on cri te ri a in so lid tu mo urs: re vi sed RE CIST gu i de li ne (ver si on 1.1). Eur J Can cer 2009;45:228-47.
  • 15. Mis hra A, Mis hra SK, Agar wal A, Agar wal G, Agar wal SK. Sur gi cal tre at ment of sternal me tas ta ses from thyro id car ci no ma: report of two ca ses. Surg To day 2001;31:799- 802.
  • 16. Du ran te C, Haddy N, Ba u din E, Le bo ul le ux S, Hartl D, Tra vag li JP, et al. Long-term out co me of 444 pa ti ents with dis tant me tas ta ses from pa pil lary and fol li cu lar thyro id car ci no ma: be - ne fits and li mits of ra di o i o di ne the rapy. J Clin En doc Me tab 2006;91:2892-9.
  • 17. Ito Y, Ma su o ka H, Fu kus hi ma M, Ino u e H, Kiha ra M, To mo da C, et al. Prog no sis and prognos tic fac tors of pa ti ents with pa pil lary car ci no ma sho wing dis tant me tas ta sis at surgery (M1 pa ti ents) in Ja pan. En doc ri ne Jo ur - nal 2010;57(6):523-31.
  • 18. Ori ta Y, Su gi ta ni I, Mat su u ra M, Us hi ji ma M, Tsu ka ha ra K, Fu ji mo to Y, et al. Prog nos tic fac tors and the the ra pe u tic stra tegy for pa ti - ents with bo ne me tas ta sis from dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id car ci no ma. Sur gery 2010;147:424- 31.
  • 19. Haq M, Har mer C. Dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id car cino ma with dis tant me tas ta ses at pre sen ta ti on: prog nos tic fac tors and out co me. Clin En doc 2005;63:87-93.
  • 20. Schlum ber ger M, Ba u din E. Se rum thyrog lo - bu lin de ter mi na ti on in the fol low-up of pa ti ents with dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id car ci no ma. Eur J En doc ri nol 1998;138:249-52.
  • 21. Maz za fer ri El, Rob bins RJ, Spen cer CA, Bra ver man LE, Pa ci ni F, War tofsky L, et al. A con sen sus re port of the ro le of se rum thyrog - lo bu lin as a mo ni to ring met hod for low risk pati ents with pa pil lary thyro id car ci no ma. J Clin En doc ri nol Me tab 2003;88:1433-41.
  • 22. Aras G, Gül te kin SS, Kü çük NO. The ad di ti ve cli ni cal va lu e of com bi ned thyrog lo bu lin and an tith yrog lo bu lin an ti body me a su re ments to de fi ne per sis tent and re cur rent di se a se in pati ents with dif fe ren ti a ted thyro id can cer. Nucl Med Comm 2008;29:880-4.
Turkish Journal of Nuclear Medicine (. Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy)-Cover
  • ISSN: 1304-1495
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 1992
  • Yayıncı: Ortadoğu Reklam Tanıtım Yayıncılık Turizm Eğitim İnşaat Sanayi ve Ticaret A.Ş.