Primary Bone Lymphomas: 18F-FDG PET and PET-CT as Methods of Diagnosis and Efficacy Estimation of Antitumor Treatment

AK Smol’yaninova1, ER Moskalets2, GA Yatsyk1, IE Kostina1, AS Bogolyubskaya3, NG Gabeeva1, EG Gemdzhian1, SA Tatarnikova1, DS Badmadzhapova1, EE Zvonkov1

1 National Research Center for Hematology, 4 Novyi Zykovskii pr-d, Moscow, Russian Federation, 125167

2 European Medical Center, 35 Shchepkina str., Moscow, Russian Federation, 129090

3 NI Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, 1 Ostrovityanova str., Moscow, Russian Federation, 117997

For correspondence: Anna Konstantinovna Smol’yaninova, MD, PhD, 4 Novyi Zykovskii pr-d, Moscow, Russian Federation, 125167; Tel.: +7(926)912-31-16; e-mail:

For citation: Smol’yaninova AK, Moskalets ER, Yatsyk GA, et al. Primary Bone Lymphomas: 18F-FDG PET and PET-CT as Methods of Diagnosis and Efficacy Estimation of Antitumor Treatment. Clinical oncohematology. 2020;13(1):33–49 (In Russ).

DOI: 10.21320/2500-2139-2020-13-1-33-49


Background. Primary bone lymphoma (PBL) is a rare malignant tumor. Initial examination aimed at detecting all primary lesions is an indispensable prerequisite for the choice of optimal antitumor treatment. Standard methods of diagnosis (X-ray, CT, and MRI) are not always adequate to measure the real tumor mass. Another well-known characteristic feature of PBL is a challenge in evaluating the effect of its treatment because of residual changes in the bones of most patients. However, the data on using 18F-FDG PET, another method of metabolic imaging, in PBL are rather rare in accessible literature.

Aim. To study the specific use of PET with 18F-FDG at initial examination and efficacy estimation of PBL treatment.

Materials & Methods. The trial included 21 PBL patients who received PET with 18F-FDG at initial examination and a month after the end of treatment. The results of 18F-FDG PET imaging were compared with the data obtained by means of structural diagnostic methods (CT and MRI) and the analysis of biopsy samples with pathologic lesions.

Results. Intensive uptake of 18F-FDG (SUVmax 8.6–40.1, mean SUVmax 23.5), according to PET data, was reported in all patients in those tumor lesions which were identified by the structural diagnostic methods and confirmed by biopsies. Besides, each of 21 cases showed pathologic infiltration of adjacent soft tissues with high metabolic activity. In PET-CT with 18F-FDG 13 further tumor localizations were revealed in 8 (38 %) patients. On completing the therapy, according to CT and MRI data, residual changes were observed in all (n = 21, 100 %) patients. The residual metabolic activity in the involved bones was identified in 13 (62 %) patients (SUVmax 2.91–8.7, mean SUVmax 4.2). In 4 of them the residual lesions were subjected to biopsy. None of 4 cases was reported to show tumors. Only in 1 out of 13 patients with residual metabolic changes a tumor relapse was detected. Overall 10-year survival in the groups of patients with and without FDG+ residual changes was 91 % and 100 %, respectively, with insignificant differences (= 0.39).

Conclusion. PET-CT with 18F-FDG is a highly sensitive technique for evaluating the primary lesion volumes in PBL patients. In 100 % of bone and soft tissue lesions an intensive uptake of 18F-FDG was observed. At the same time our study showed persistent metabolic activity on completing antitumor treatment in more than a half of patients, and in most of them it was not caused by tumor. Therefore, in our view, ongoing residual metabolic activity in PBL cannot always be regarded as an indication for continued treatment or consolidation radiotherapy.

Keywords: primary bone lymphoma, survival, positron emission tomography, diagnosis, efficacy estimation of antitumor treatment.

Received: August 2, 2019

Accepted: December 5, 2019

Read in PDF


  1. Matikas A, Briasoulis A, Tzannou I, et al. Primary bone lymphoma: a retrospective analysis of 22 patients treated in a single tertiary center. Acta Haematol. 2013;130(4):291–6. doi: 10.1159/000351051.

  2. Bacci G, Jaffe N, Emiliani E, et al. Therapy for primary non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma of bone and a comparison of results with Ewing’s sarcoma. Ten year’s experience at the Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli. Cancer. 1986;57(8):1468–72. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19860415)57:8<1468::aid-cncr2820570806>;2-0.

  3. Fidias P, Spiro I, Scobczak ML, et al. Long-term results of combined modality therapy in primary bone lymphomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45(5):1213–38. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(99)00305-3.

  4. Messina C, Ferreri AJ, Govi S, et al. Clinical features, management and prognosis of multifocal primary bone lymphoma: a retrospective study of the international Extranodal Lymphoma Study Group (the IELSG 14 study). Br J Haematol. 2014;164(6):834–40. doi: 10.1111/bjh.12714.

  5. Морозова А.К., Звонков Е.Е., Мамонов В.Е. и др. Первичные лимфатические опухоли костей и мягких тканей: сравнительная оценка результатов лечения. Терапевтический архив. 2012;84(7):42–9.

    [Morozova AK, Zvonkov EE, Mamonov VE, et al. Primary lymphomas of bones and soft tissues: comparative assessment of treatment results. Terapevticheskii arkhiv. 2012;84(7):42–9. (In Russ)]

  6. Gabeeva NG, Zvonkov EE, Morozova AK, et al. Long-term follow-up of primary bone diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with m NHL-BFM-90. Blood. 2016;128(22):3025.

  7. Смольянинова А.К., Габеева Н.Г., Мамонов В.Е. и др. Первичная лимфома костей: 10-летние результаты проспективного исследования в одной клинике. Гематология и трансфузиология. 2018;63(S1):181.

    [Smol’yaninova AK, Gabeeva NG, Mamonov VE, et al. Primary bone lymphoma: 10-year results of a prospective single-center trial. Gematologiya i transfuziologiya. 2018;63(S1):181. (In Russ)]

  8. Lewis VO, Primus G, Anastasi J, et al. Oncologic outcomes of primary lymphomas of bone in adults. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2003;415:90–7. doi: 10.1097/

  9. Ostrowski ML, Unni KK, Banks PM, et al. Malignant Lymphoma of Bone. Cancer. 1986;58(12):2646–55. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19861215)58:12<2646::aid-cncr2820581217>;2-u.

  10. Смольянинова А.К., Габеева Н.Г., Мамонов В.Е. и др. Первичные лимфомы костей: долгосрочные результаты проспективного одноцентрового исследования. Клиническая онкогематология. 2019;12(3):247–62. doi: 10.21320/2500-2139-2019-12-3-247-262.

    [Smol’yaninova AK, Gabeeva NG, Mamonov VE, et al. Primary Bone Lymphomas: Long-Term Results of a Prospective Single-Center Trial. Clinical oncohematology. 2019;12(3):247–62. doi: 10.21320/2500-2139-2019-12-3-247-262. (In Russ)]

  11. Ueda T, Aozasa K, Ohsawa M, et al. Malignant lymphomas of bone in Japan. Cancer. 1989;64(11):2387–92. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19891201)64:11<2387::aid-cncr2820641132>;2-1

  12. Meignan M, Barrington S, Itti E, et al. Report on the 4th international workshop on positron emission tomography in lymphoma held in Menton, France, 3–5 October 2012. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;55(1):31–7. doi: 10.3109/10428194.2013.802784.

  13. Егорова Е.К., Габеева Н.Г., Мамонов В.Е. и др. Первичные лимфатические опухоли костей: описание двух случаев и обзор литературы. Онкогематология. 2008;3(4):5–10.

    [Egorova EK, Gabeeva NG, Mamonov VE, et al. Primary lymphatic tumors of bones: two case reports and a review of l Onkogematologiya. 2008;3(4):5–10. (In Russ)]

  14. Christie DR, Dear K, Le T, et al. Limited chemotherapy and shrinking field radiotherapy for osteolymphoma (primary bone lymphoma): results from the trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group 99.04 and Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group LY02 prospective trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80(4):1164–70. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.03.036.

  15. Iwaya Y, Tekenaka K, Akamatsu T. Primary Gastric Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma with Orbital Involvement: Diagnostic Usefulness of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography. Intern Med. 2011;50(18):1953–6. doi: 10.2169/internalmedicine.50.5524.

  16. Demircay E, Hornicek J, Mankin HJ, at al. Malignant Lymphoma of Bone: A Review of 119 Patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(8):2684–90. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-2991-x.

  17. Fletcher CDM, Unni KK, Mertens F. (eds) Pathology and genetics of tumours of soft tissue and bone. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. 3rd Edition. Lyon: IARC Press; 2002.

  18. Fletcher CDM. The evolving classification of soft tissue tumours: an update based on the new WHO classification. Histopathology. 2006;48(1):3–12. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2005.02284.x.

  19. Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn P, Mertens F. World health organization classification of tumours of soft tissue and bone. 4th edition. Lyon: IARC Press; 2013. 468 p.

  20. Krishnan А, Shirkhoda А, Tehranzadeh Т, et al. Primary Bone Lymphoma: Radiographic–MR Imaging Correlation. RadioGraph. 2003;23(6):1371–87. doi: 10.1148/rg.236025056.

  21. Mulligani ME, Kransdorf MJ. Sequestra in Primary Lymphoma of Bone: Prevalence and Radiologic Features. Am J Roentgenol. 1993;160(6):1245–8. doi: 10.2214/ajr.160.6.8498226.

  22. Canete AN, Bloem HL, Kroon HM. Primary bone tumors of the spine. Radiologia. 2016;58(Suppl 1):68–80. doi: 10.1016/j.rx.2016.01.001.

  23. Mikhaeel NG. Primary bone lymphoma. Clin Oncol. 2012;24(5):366–70. doi: 10.1016/j.clon.2012.02.006.

  24. Hicks DC, Gokan T, O’Keefe RJ, et al. Primary lymphoma of bone: correlation of magnetic resonance imaging features with cytokine production by tumor cells. Cancer. 1995;75(4):973–80. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19950215)75:4<973::aid-cncr2820750412>;2-8.

  25. Messina C, Christie D, Zucca E, et al. Primary and secondary bone lymphomas. Cancer Treat Rev. 2015;41(3):235–46. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.02.001.

  26. Remier RR, Bruce AC, Yong RC, et al. Lymphoma Presenting in Bone. Results of Histopathology, Staging, and Therapy. Ann Inter Med. 1977;87(1):50–5. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-87-1-50.

  27. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(27):3059–67. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.8800.

  28. Jawad MU, Schneiderbauer MM, Min ES, et al. Primary Lymphoma of Bone in Adult Patients. Cancer. 2010;116(4):871–9. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24828.

  29. Schaefer NG, Strobel K, Taverna C, et al. Bone involvement in patients with lymphoma: the role of FDG-PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2007;34(1):60–7. doi: 10.1007/s00259-006-0238-8.

  30. Ramadan KM, Shenkier T, Sehn LH, et al. 131 patients with primary bone lymphoma: a population-based study of successively treated cohorts from the British Columbia Cancer Agency. Ann Oncol. 2007;18(1):129–35. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdl329.

  31. Park YH, Kim S, Choi SJ, et al. Clinical impact of whole-body FDG-PET for evaluation of response and therapeutic decision-making of primary lymphoma of bone. Ann Oncol. 2005;16(8):1401–2. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdi234.

  32. Park YH, Choi SJ, Ryoo BY, et al. PET imaging with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose for primary lymphoma of bone. Clin Nucl Med. 2005;30(2):131–4. doi: 10.1097/00003072-200502000-00020.

  33. Singh Т, Satheesh С, Lakshmaiah С, et al. Primary bone lymphoma: A report of two cases and review of the literature. J Cancer Res Ther. 2010;6(3):296–8. doi: 10.4103/0973-1482.73366.

  34. Wang LJ, Wu HB, Wang M, et al. Utility of F-18 FDG PET/CT on the evaluation of primary bone lymphoma. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84(11):2275–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.09.011.

  35. Baar J, Burkes RL, Gospodarowicz M. Primary non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma of bone. Semin Oncol. 1999;26(3):270–5.

  36. Liu Y. The role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in staging and restaging primary bone lymphoma. Nucl Med Commun. 2017;38(4):319–24. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000652.

  37. Kim SY, Shin DY, Lee SS. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of primary bone lymphoma in Korea. Korean J Hematol. 2012;47(3):213–8. doi: 10.5045/kjh.2012.47.3.213.

  38. Milks KS, McLean TW, Anthony EY. Imaging of primary pediatric lymphoma of bone. Pediatr Radiol. 2016;46(8):1150–7. doi: 10.1007/s00247-016-3597-8.

  39. Zinzani PL, Carrillo G, Ascani S, et al. Primary bone lymphoma: experience with 52 patients. Haematologica. 2003;88(3):280–5.

  40. Baar J, Burkes R, Bell R. Primary Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma of Bone. A clinicopathologic study. Cancer. 1994;73(4):1194–9. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19940215)73:4<1194::aid-cncr2820730412>;2-r.

  41. Choi J, Raghavan M. Diagnostic imaging and Image-Guided Therapy of Skeletal Metastases. Cancer Control. 2012;19(2):102–12. doi: 10.1177/107327481201900204.

  42. Hwang S. Imaging of lymphoma of musculoskeletal system. Magn Reson Imag Clin N Am. 2010;18(1):75–93. doi: 10.1016/j.mric.2009.09.006.

  43. Rapoport AP, Constine LS, Packman CH, et al. Treatment of Multifocal Lymphoma of Bone With Intensified Promace-Cytabom Chemotherapy and Involved Field Radiotherapy. Am J Hematol. 1998;58(1):1–7. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-8652(199805)58:1<1::AID-AJH1>3.0.CO;2-X.

  44. Seymour JF. Extra-nodal lymphoma in rare localisations: bone, breast and testes. Hematol Oncol. 2013;31(Suppl 1):60–3. doi: 10.1002/hon.2081.

  45. Ng AP, Wirth A, Seymour JF, et al. Early therapeutic response assessment by (18)FDG-positron emission tomography during chemotherapy in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Isolated residual positivity involving bone is not usually a predictor of subsequent treatment failure. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48(3):596–600. doi: 10.1080/10428190601099965.

  46. Rigacci L, Kovalchuk S, Berti V, et al. The use of Deauville 5-point score could reduce the risk of false-positive fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the posttherapy evaluation of patients with primary bone lymphomas. World J Nucl Med. 2018;17(3):157–65. doi: 10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_42_17.

  47. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, et al. Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(21):4652–61. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.891.

  48. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, et al. International Harmonization Project for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):579–86. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.2403.

  49. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):571–8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.2305.

  50. Albano D, Agnello F, Patti C, et al. Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and FDG-PET/CT for lymphoma staging: Assessment of patient experience. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2017;48(4):1043–7. doi: 1016/j.ejrnm.2017.06.002.

  51. Wang D, Huo Y, Chen S et al. Whole-body MRI versus 18F-FDG PET/CT for pretherapeutic assessment and staging of lymphoma: a meta-analysis. OncoTarg Ther. 2018;11:3597–608. doi: 10.2147/OTT.S148189.

  52. Galia M, Albano D, Tarella C, et al. Whole body magnetic resonance in indolent lymphomas under watchful waiting: the time is now. Eur Radiol. 2017;28(3):1187–93. doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5071-x.

  53. Toledano-Massiah S, Luciani A, Itti E, et al. Whole-Body Diffusion-weighted Imaging in Hodgkin Lymphoma and Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. RadioGraph. 2015;35(3):747–64. doi: 10.1148/rg.2015140145.

  54. Koh D, Collins DJ. Diffusion-Weighted MRI in the Body: Applications and Challenges in Oncology. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(6):1622–35. doi: 10.2214/AJR.06.1403.