English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

With great interest, we read the article by Inal A. et al on the comparison FDG-PET/CT and Bone scan in bone metastasis of NSCLC (April issue 2014, Contemporary Oncology) [1]. We would like to ask the authors two questions. First, we usually take a maximum standard uptake value into consideration in evaluating metastasis in FDG-PET/CT [2]. How about the value in this study population? How much value the authors evaluated its cutoff value in evaluating bone metastasis? Second, the majority of NSCLC patients are middle-aged or elderly, and many of them have degenerative changes in vertebral bones, which may sometimes have uptake both in FDG-PET/CT and bone scan. How the authors differentiate metastasis from degenerative change in FDG-PET/CT and bone scan? How about the difference in sensitivity and specificity in vertebral bones in their patients evaluated?

Letter to Editor Comparison between FDG-PET/CT and bone scan in bone metastasis from NSCLC