Bone marrow infiltration (BMI), categorized as an extra-nodal site, affects stage and is associated with poor prognosis in newly diagnosed lymphoma patients. We have evaluated the accuracy of PET/CT and bone marrow biopsy (BMB) to assess BMI in 372 lymphoma patients [140 Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) and 232 High Grade B-cell non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (HG B-NHL), among them 155 Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLCL)]. For HL cases, and taking into account PET/CT, sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy were 96.7, 99.3, and 99.3% while those of BMB were 32.3, 83.8, and 85%, respectively. For HG B-NHL and considering PET/CT, sensitivity, NPV, and accuracy were 52.7, 81.7, and 84.1%, while those of BMB were 77.6, 90.2, and 90.7%, respectively. In the HG B-NHL group, 25 patients would have been under-staged without BMB. These results lead us to recommend PET/CT and the avoidance of BMB to assess BMI in HL. In the case of HG B-NHL, bone marrow status should be assessed firstly by means of PET/CT; only in either focal or diffuse PET/CT with low borderline SUV max values or in negative cases, should BMB be carried out afterwards. In the HG B-NHL setting and at the present moment, both techniques are complementary.

A good agreement was found between pFBB and FDG data as obtained by subjective visual and quantitative analyses. Dual-point FBB PET scans could offer complementary information (similar to that from FDG PET and FBB PET) in a single procedure, considering pFBB as a surrogate of FDG.

Several studies have reported uneven results when evaluating the prognostic value of bone marrow biopsy (BMB) and PET/CT as part of the staging of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The heterogeneity of the inclusion criteria and not taking into account selection and collinearity biases in the analysis models might explain part of these discrepancies. To address this issue we have carried a retrospective multicenter study including 268 DLBCL patients with a BMB and a PET/CT available at diagnosis where we estimated both the prognosis impact and the diagnostic accuracy of each technique. Only patients treated with R‐CHOP/21 as first line (n = 203) were included in the survival analysis. With a median follow‐up of 25 months the estimated 3‐year progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 76.3% and 82.7% respectively. In a multivariate analysis designed to avoid a collinearity bias with IPI categories, BMB‐BMI [bone marrow involvement](+) (HR: 3.6) and ECOG PS > 1 (HR: 2.9) were independently associated with a shorter PFS and three factors, age >60 years old (HR: 2.4), ECOG PS >1 (HR: 2.4), and abnormally elevated B2‐microglobulin levels (HR: 2.2) were independently associated with a shorter OS. In our DLBCL cohort, treated with a uniform first‐line chemotherapy regimen, BMI by BMB complemented performance status in predicting those patients with a higher risk for relapse or progression. In this cohort BMI by PET/CT could not independently predict a shorter PFS and/or OS.

To evaluate the use of amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) in routine clinical practice, in a selected population with cognitive impairment that meets appropriate use criteria (AUC). A multicenter, observational, prospective case-series study of 211patients from 2 level-3 hospitals who fulfilled clinical AUC for amyloid-PET scan in a naturalistic setting. Certainty degree was evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale: 0 (very low probability); 1 (low probability); 2 (intermediate probability); 3 (high probability); and 4 (practically sure), before and after amyloid PET. The treatment plan was considered as cognition-specific or noncognition-specific. Amyloid-PET was positive in 118 patients (55.9%) and negative in 93 patients (44.1%). Diagnostic prescan confidence according amyloid-PET results showed that in both, negative and positive-PET subgroup, the most frequent category was intermediate probability (45.7% and 55.1%, respectively). After the amyloid-PET, the diagnostic confidence showed a very different distribution, that was, in the negative-PET group the most frequent categories are very unlikely (70.7%) and unlikely (29.3%), while in the positive-PET group were very probable (57.6%) and practically sure (39%). Only in 14/211 patients (6.6%) the result of the amyloid-PET did not influence the diagnostic confidence, while in 194 patients (93.4%), the diagnostic confidence improved significantly after amyloid-PET results. The therapeutic intention was modified in 93 patients (44.1%). Specific treatment for Alzheimer disease was started, before amyloid-PET, in 80 patients (37.9%). This naturalistic study provides evidence that the implementation of amyloid-PET is associated with a significant improvement in diagnostic confidence and has a high impact on the therapeutic management of patients with mild cognitive impairment fulfilled clinical AUC.