Medical imaging and nuclear medicine: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

The diagnosis and treatment of patients with cancer requires access to imaging to ensure accurate management decisions and optimal outcomes. Our global assessment of imaging and nuclear medicine resources identified substantial shortages in equipment and workforce, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). A microsimulation model of 11 cancers showed that the scale-up of imaging would avert 3·2% (2·46 million) of all 76·0 million deaths caused by the modelled cancers worldwide between 2020 and 2030, saving 54·92 million life-years. A comprehensive scale-up of imaging, treatment, and care quality would avert 9·55 million (12·5%) of all cancer deaths caused by the modelled cancers worldwide, saving 232·30 million life-years. Scale-up of imaging would cost US$6·84 billion in 2020-30 but yield lifetime productivity gains of $1·23 trillion worldwide, a net return of $179·19 per $1 invested. Combining the scale-up of imaging, treatment, and quality of care would provide a net benefit of $2·66 trillion and a net return of $12·43 per $1 invested. With the use of a conservative approach regarding human capital, the scale-up of imaging alone would provide a net benefit of $209·46 billion and net return of $31·61 per $1 invested. With comprehensive scale-up, the worldwide net benefit using the human capital approach is $340·42 billion and the return per dollar invested is $2·46. These improved health and economic outcomes hold true across all geographical regions. We propose actions and investments that would enhance access to imaging equipment, workforce capacity, digital technology, radiopharmaceuticals, and research and training programmes in LMICs, to produce massive health and economic benefits and reduce the burden of cancer globally.

Economics of New Molecular Targeted Personalized Radiopharmaceuticals.

Nuclear medicine has come a long way since 2007 when Adrian Nunn pointed out the approval of radiopharmaceuticals was at an all-time low with all the major radiopharmaceutical agents in use having been approved over 10 years ago. Challenges being the prohibitively high cost of drug development and the large number of drugs failing in clinical trials. Proceed to today where molecular imaging is fast-tracking the drug discovery process by reducing both the time and cost to screen candidates by quantitating the drugs effect on the target and toxicity to normal tissues. Nuclear medicine is now leading medical practice in personalized medicine using the theragnostic approach. Theragnostics is defined as the use of molecular diagnostic techniques in real time to stratify patients to guide treatment decisions such as the choice of drug, the dose of administration, and the timing of drug delivery for a given patient. Enabling visualization and quantitation of in vivo function of the whole body and thus patient heterogeneity and variability informs the physician on how to treat an individual patient. Recent successes such as the Food and Drug Administration approval of Lutathera and NETSPOT have resulted in an increasing number of pharmaceutical companies pursing theragnostics further heightened by the purchase of Advanced Accelerator Applications for 3.9 billion by Novartis and Endocyte, Inc for 2.1 billion. Theragnostics are further aiding drug development by showing which agents are most viable and reducing the overall cost of bringing a drug to clinical trials and regulatory approval. This is indeed a renaissance for nuclear medicine in which the acceptance of imaging to inform and monitor therapy has been embraced and even required by the Food and Drug Administration for the clinical evaluation of targeted therapeutic radiopharmaceuticals showing there is indeed a viable business model for targeted theragnostic radiopharmaceuticals and personalized medicine.

Nuclear Medicine and Wall Street: An Evolving Relationship.

Until recently, it has been challenging to engage Wall Street and large pharmaceutical companies in radiopharmaceutical opportunities. The modest economic prospects of most diagnostic radiopharmaceuticals have not attracted keen interest from the broader business community, despite the rapid advancement of diagnostic imaging capabilities and their increasingly crucial role in the therapeutic process. Similarly, compelling science supporting select radiopharmaceutical therapies in oncology has been overshadowed by the unique challenges posed by this class of drugs and historical commercial failures that serve as sobering reminders of risk. Fortunately, a few notable successes in the targeted radioligand therapeutic space are changing this dynamic, fueling a new flow of investor capital into these technologies and inciting increased merger and acquisition activity that has yielded significant value creation for investors. If the nuclear medicine industry is able to continue to effectively manage historical challenges, then there is significant opportunity for a new and promising wave of radioligand therapies to significantly change the oncology treatment paradigm and elevate the profile of the entire nuclear medicine sector.

Three Nuclear Medicine diagnostic procedures and breast cancer mortality in women. A population-analysis in Taiwan based upon National Health Insurance database.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the correlation between the utilization of nuclear medicine diagnostic procedures and the mortality of women with breast cancer. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Based on the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD), we studied female breast cancer patients in 2012 who underwent whole-body bone scan, lymphoscintigraphy, or fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) for possibly managing breast cancer metastases. The mortality of breast cancer was then followed up in 2017. Multiple linear regression analysis was applied to analyze the correlation between the use of any of these three nuclear medicine procedures and the mortality of breast cancer. RESULTS: For patients with early-stage breast cancer, single lymphoscintigraphy was the most frequently performed nuclear medicine procedure, accounting for 36.4% of all three nuclear medicine procedures. For patients with late-stage breast cancer, single whole-body bone scan was the most frequently performed nuclear medicine procedure, accounting for 67.2% of all three nuclear medicine procedures. Mortality of breast cancer significantly increased with the prevalence of late-stage breast cancer (b=2.87, P=0.001) and significantly decreased in cases in which whole-body bone scan was used (b=-4.28, P=0.003). CONCLUSION: The mortality of women with late-stage breast cancer was negatively related to the utilization of whole-body bone scan but not to the utilization of lymphoscintigraphy or the 18F-FDG PET/CT scan. In women with early-stage breast cancer, no significant correlation existed between breast cancer mortality and the utilization of the above three nuclear medicine procedures.

The Physician Payment Sunshine Act: Evaluating Industrial Payments in Radiology.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The characterization of payments made to physicians by pharmaceutical companies, device manufacturers, and group purchasing organizations is crucial for assessing potential conflicts of interest and their impact on practice patterns. This study examines the compensation received by general radiologists (GR) in the United States, as well as radiologists in the following five subspecialties: body imaging, neuroradiology, pediatric radiology, nuclear radiology and radiological physics, and vascular and interventional radiology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were extracted from the Open Payments database for radiology subspecialists in the United States who received installments in calendar year 2015 from pharmaceutical and device manufacturing companies. RESULTS: In 2015, a total of $43,685,052 was paid in 65,507 payments (mean $667/payment; median $32/payment) to radiologists, including 9826 GR, 362 body imaging radiologists, 479 neuroradiologists, 127 pediatric radiologists, 175 physicians in nuclear radiology and radiological physics, and 1584 vascular and interventional radiologists. Payments were unequally distributed across these six major subspecialties of radiology (p < 0.01), with GR receiving the largest number of total payments (44,695), and neuroradiologists receiving significantly higher median payments than any other subspecialty ($80 vs $32 for all radiologists; p < 0.01). Medtronic Neurovascular was the single largest payer to all radiologists combined. CONCLUSION: Commercial entities make substantial payments to radiologists, with a significant variation in payments made to the different radiology subspecialties. While the largest number of total payments was made to GGR, the highest median payments were made to neuroradiologists, and significant dispersion in these payments was seen across different geographic regions. The impact of these payments on practice patterns remains to be elucidated.

Analysis of factors correlating with medical radiological examination frequencies.

The European Commission (EC) funded project Dose Datamed 2 (DDM2) had two objectives: to collect available data on patient doses from the radiodiagnostic procedures (X-ray and nuclear medicine) in Europe, and to facilitate the implementation of the Radiation Protection 154 Guidelines (RP154). Besides the collection of frequency and dose data, two questionnaires were issued to gather information about medical radiological imaging. This article analyses a possible correlation between the collected frequency data, selected variables from the results of the detailed questionnaire and national economic data. Based on a 35 countries dataset, there is no correlation between the gross domestic product (GDP) and the total number of X-ray examinations in a country. However, there is a significant correlation (p < 0.01) between the GDP and the overall CT examination frequency. High income countries perform more CT examinations per inhabitant. That suggests that planar X-ray examinations are replaced by CT examinations.