Results 1 to 7 of 7
bone scan v. PET scan
  1. #1
    joycelyn Guest

    Default bone scan v. PET scan

    I am new to this site, so I appologize if I ask a question that has been
    asked already. I have looked all over the internet.
    My mother had breast cancer about 5 years ago. Stage 3. Since, she has
    been
    doing great, but lately has been sick often. She has been in the
    hospital
    with pneumonia twice in the last 6 months and has back and leg pain
    continually. She had a bone scan that showed "moderate concern" for
    cancer
    in ribs on the same side as the breast cancer. She hadn't been going
    back
    to
    her oncologist due to insurance problems, but she went back and we were
    told
    to have a PET scan. Her PET scan didn't show anything. I know that you
    are
    not supposed to eat for so long or have any alcohol for so long before
    the
    test. I am not sure if she understood the significance of this. Would
    that
    have affected the outcome? I am excited that the PET was negative, but
    at
    the same time, I am very worried. Her oncologist basically sent her on
    her way due to the negative PET scan, but she is still not well and I am
    afraid something may still be wrong. Is a bone scan that unreliable? I
    appreciate any comments and thank you
    for your help.
    Joy




  2. #2
    DrDach Guest

    Default Re: bone scan v. PET scan

    On Jun 1, 3:52 pm, "joycelyn" <joycelynstall...@yahoo.com> wrote:
    > I am new to this site, so I appologize if I ask a question that has been
    > asked already. I have looked all over the internet.
    > My mother had breast cancer about 5 years ago. Stage 3. Since, she has
    > been doing great, but lately has been sick often. She has been in the
    > hospital with pneumonia twice in the last 6 months and has back and leg pain
    > continually. She had a bone scan that showed "moderate concern" for
    > cancer in ribs on the same side as the breast cancer. She hadn't been going
    > back to her oncologist due to insurance problems, but she went back and we were
    > told to have a PET scan. Her PET scan didn't show anything. I know that you
    > are not supposed to eat for so long or have any alcohol for so long before
    > the test. I am not sure if she understood the significance of this. Would
    > that have affected the outcome? I am excited that the PET was negative, but
    > at the same time, I am very worried. Her oncologist basically sent her on
    > her way due to the negative PET scan, but she is still not well and I am
    > afraid something may still be wrong. Is a bone scan that unreliable? I
    > appreciate any comments and thank you
    > for your help.
    > Joy


    Dear Joy,

    PET scan shows the metabolic activity with uptake of radio-labeled
    glucose, so if the PET scan is negative, that is a very good sign that
    the findings on the radionuclide bone scan are probably not
    metabolically active tumor. One way to find out is to Xray a few of
    the suspicious areas noted on the bone scan. Bone scans are
    notoriously nonspecific, as areas of osteoarthritis or benign
    compression fractures will show increased activity which is difficult
    to separate from bone involvement by cancer. If the Xrays are not
    particularly helpful, then a CAT scan of the area will almost always
    resolve the issue.

    Regarding prevention of breast cancer, please see my article:

    http://jeffreydach.com/2007/05/05/je...achiodine.aspx

    regards from jeffrey dach

    disclaimer: The information contained here is NOT intended to diagnose
    or treat any existing disease or ailment, or to replace in any way the
    patient /physican relationship with your own personal physician. Note
    that all contents of this message, including any advice, suggestions,
    and/or recommendations has NOT been generated as part of any
    professional evaluation. No patient has been examined prior to making
    these comments; no professional fee has been charged by or paid to
    myself. Regarding the nutritional supplements which may be mentioned:
    These have not been evaluated by the FDA and are not intended to treat
    disease. Any comments made about nutritional supplements are of a
    general nature and not intended to provide personal advice. The reader
    should seek the advice of a trusted health care professional regarding
    the use, risks, benefits, indications, and contra-indications of the
    various nutritional supplements which may be mentioned. Regarding FDA
    approved pharmaceutical drugs mentioned: Any comments made about drugs
    are of a general nature and not intended to provide personal advice.
    The reader should seek the advice of a trusted health care
    professional regarding the use, risks, benefits, indications, and
    contra-indications of drugs. The reader is advised to discuss the
    comments on these pages with his/her personal physicians and to only
    act upon the advice of his/her personal physician Also note that
    concerning an answer which appears as an electronically posted
    question, I am NOT creating a physician -- patient relationship.
    Although identities will remain confidential as much as possible, as I
    can not control the media, I can not take responsibility for any
    breaches of confidentiality that may occur Finally, the material
    produced by myself may be reproduced for personal use, provided that
    appropriate credit is given; but this material may not be reprinted or
    reproduced in any format for any other purpose.(c) 2007 jeffrey dach
    md





  3. #3
    Pami Guest

    Default Re: bone scan v. PET scan

    I agree with this as I had a bone scan and I had increased uptake on the
    opposite side of the breast with the cancer. They really scared me as I had
    to have a repeat bone scan. I then went for a mammo on that side and took
    my films to that radiologist. He ordered chest x-rays and it showed to be
    clean. I've never had a Petscan but will get one soon. The radiologist did
    suggest repeating the bone scan in 3 months time as it showed uptake there
    but not on the chest x-ray. I know we all have to be watched and the
    waiting to find out is the worst.
    Pami



  4. #4
    Jeffrey Dach Guest

    Default Re: bone scan v. PET scan

    On Jun 2, 11:02 pm, "Pami" <pdefr...@hvc.rr.com> wrote:
    > I agree with this as I had a bone scan and I had increased uptake on the
    > opposite side of the breast with the cancer. They really scared me as I had
    > to have a repeat bone scan. I then went for a mammo on that side and took
    > my films to that radiologist. He ordered chest x-rays and it showed to be
    > clean. I've never had a Petscan but will get one soon. The radiologist did
    > suggest repeating the bone scan in 3 months time as it showed uptake there
    > but not on the chest x-ray. I know we all have to be watched and the
    > waiting to find out is the worst.
    > Pami


    For an example of what a normal bone scan looks like compared to an
    abnormal bone scan showing involvement with metastatic cancer, see
    this page:

    http://www.drdach.com/Bone_Scan_Breast_Cancer.html

    jeffrey dach
    http://jeffreydach.com/


  5. #5
    Tim Jackson Guest

    Default Re: bone scan v. PET scan

    joycelyn wrote:
    > I am new to this site, so I appologize if I ask a question that has been
    > asked already. I have looked all over the internet.
    > My mother had breast cancer about 5 years ago. Stage 3. Since, she has
    > been
    > doing great, but lately has been sick often. She has been in the
    > hospital
    > with pneumonia twice in the last 6 months and has back and leg pain
    > continually. She had a bone scan that showed "moderate concern" for
    > cancer
    > in ribs on the same side as the breast cancer. She hadn't been going
    > back
    > to
    > her oncologist due to insurance problems, but she went back and we were
    > told
    > to have a PET scan. Her PET scan didn't show anything. I know that you
    > are
    > not supposed to eat for so long or have any alcohol for so long before
    > the
    > test. I am not sure if she understood the significance of this. Would
    > that
    > have affected the outcome? I am excited that the PET was negative, but
    > at
    > the same time, I am very worried. Her oncologist basically sent her on
    > her way due to the negative PET scan, but she is still not well and I am
    > afraid something may still be wrong. Is a bone scan that unreliable? I
    > appreciate any comments and thank you
    > for your help.
    > Joy
    >
    >
    >


    Sickness, pneumonia and sciatica doesn't for me jell with "moderate
    concern" on a bone scan and a clean PET. I'd guess it's not cancer.

    Seem to me if she had bone-mets related sciatica her spine would light
    up like a Christmas tree. Negatives on the bone scan are good. False
    positives are common as it lights up for any sort of inflammatory
    process, but false negatives are relatively rare.

    I don't really know about the implications of eating or alcohol on PET,
    but I don't really see any mechanism for a false negative there either.
    Again PET is notoriously sensitive and prone to false positives.

    Doesn't mean there aren't mets there, but it doesn't sound to me like
    the symptoms are related to any spread of cancer, so there is no
    particular evidence that there is any metastasis at all.

    Sounds to me like she should maybe be seeing an orthopod not an
    oncologist. Doctors tend not to diagnose mets until everything else has
    been ruled out, so the book procedure is to approach her problems as a
    new condition. Take it to her GP and get a diagnosis or reference to
    specialists as necessary, disregarding the history of cancer.


    Tim Jackson

  6. #6
    Louanne M Guest

    Default Re: bone scan v. PET scan

    My sister had a petscan several year ago, she lit up like you said like
    a Xmas tree. Her oncologist, told her that her nodes behind her heart
    were enlarged and that meant some kind of cancer, probably Hodgkins.
    She had a biospy done by a well know heart surgeon, he came out of
    surgery and told her she did not have any cancer. He, the surgeon and
    the cancer dr almost got into it. He told the surgeion then you did not
    do it right, or did not take enough samples. The heart dr said he took
    multi samples. NO CANCER. Dr want her to repeat a biospy, which she
    refused. She said was worse than her open heart surgery. Like I said
    that was several years ago and she is still her. So Pet scans can be
    WRONG.


  7. #7
    Mary Fisher Guest

    Default Re: bone scan v. PET scan


    "Louanne M" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:26136-467[email protected]..
    > My sister had a petscan several year ago, she lit up like you said like
    > a Xmas tree. Her oncologist, told her that her nodes behind her heart
    > were enlarged and that meant some kind of cancer, probably Hodgkins.
    > She had a biospy done by a well know heart surgeon, he came out of
    > surgery and told her she did not have any cancer. He, the surgeon and
    > the cancer dr almost got into it. He told the surgeion then you did not
    > do it right, or did not take enough samples. The heart dr said he took
    > multi samples. NO CANCER. Dr want her to repeat a biospy, which she
    > refused. She said was worse than her open heart surgery. Like I said
    > that was several years ago and she is still her. So Pet scans can be
    > WRONG.


    they can be right too.
    >




Similar Threads

  1. re bone scan
    By Kathy howard in forum alt.support.cancer.breast
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-31-2007, 05:45 PM
  2. bone scan
    By Kathy howard in forum alt.support.cancer.breast
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-01-2007, 12:45 AM
  3. BONE SCAN
    By colophony in forum alt.support.cancer.prostate
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-17-2007, 04:51 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28