Types of scans

[Carcinomacarolyn]

What is more accurate at detecting disease progression, bone scans, MRIs or PET scans. I’m so confused, as my PET scans show progression, but my blood work and lack of pain don’t match up. June 6th I am scheduled for my first bone scan. Thank you

[Barbteeth]

I always have CT scans but had a PET scan recently and I get results tomorrow...I’m terrified what it will show as I’ve had growth in a liver met...I don’t really know a lot but I do know that PET scans show activity at a cellular level but why oncologists choose one type over another at different times I’m not sure

No help am I?

Barb xx

[mariootsi in reply to Barbteeth]

Barb,

Wishing you good luck with your results.

[blms]

PET scans rae better at detecting faster spreading cancers such as lung. Breast cancer cells do not divide as quickly as some others, therefore it is preferrred by many big cancer centers in US to have CT anad Bone scans as being more accurate. Too many misdiagnosed with PET and CAT shows differently. PLUS a PET scan is MUCH more radiation even with the combo of the other two scans combined.

[Carcinomacarolyn in reply to blms]

Thank you. This is very helpful.

[mariootsi]

My onc orders ct scans.

[Barbteeth]

I’m really worried that something awful will show up that the CT didn’t...also if there are more than one liver lesion then I won’t be able to have the radiation and will have to change meds which I dread..I know whittling won’t change a thing!!

Went out for a long ride with two chums and that took my mind off it...going to yoga in a bit

Thanks for your good wishes..means a lot

Barb xx

[Purple60 in reply to Barbteeth]

Thinking of you and sending positive thoughts for good news on your scan!

[Barbteeth in reply to Purple60]

Thank you..means s lot to be thought of...will let you know later re result..appointment not till 5.30 pm ☹️

Barb xx

[Hidden]

I'll offer a somewhat different, admittedly inexpert, point of view. I get PET/CT combo scans every three months. At one place I go (sort of a tier II center), the CT is NOT diagnostic...which I take to mean not as clear/accurate as it could be, so the focus is on the PET readout. When I go to a tier I center, the CT IS diagnostic, so I get a full readout on both.

I had a bone scan only once, when initially diagnosed.

Since my mastectomy, way back when, I don't think I've had an MRI.

My understanding of why the PET is valuable is because with widespread bone mets, only the PET can clearly discern hot spots vs. sclerotic (healed/healing?) areas of tumors. So pretty much any tumor I've ever head shows up on the CT at its largest size. The PET report tells me if it's entirely sclerotic, partially sclerotic, etc. I appreciate the numerical readout of the PET re: avidity/FDG uptake rate, since it tells me which tumors are getting hotter or cooler...I feel well informed about the nuances, not just the size/volume of tumors...

On occasion, my docs have mentioned or anticipated trouble getting the PET approved by insurance, so I assume it's more expensive. But they've always gotten it through...

[Purple60]

It is interesting that standards of care seem to vary across countries and perhaps within countries depending upon who is paying the bill. PET Scans are more expensive than CT Scans. The various bill payers (governments or insurers) likely look at the cost-benefit of the results of these tests. Having said that, my onc in the US explained the same that Barb mentioned, the PET can see activity at the cellular level even if a fully formed lesion is not yet visible. So potentially the PET Scan can detect sites of metastasis earlier. Ultimately, it may not make a difference in clinical outcomes and so I suspect that is why we see differences in standards of care across clinicians or country practices.