nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

01.08.2008 | Original Article

Performance of integrated FDG–PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDG–PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT

verfasst von: Kazuhiro Kitajima, Koji Murakami, Erena Yamasaki, Yasushi Domeki, Yasushi Kaji, Ichio Fukasawa, Noriyuki Inaba, Narufumi Suganuma, Kazuro Sugimura

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 8/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) using ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose with IV contrast for depiction of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer and to assess the impact of PET/contrast-enhanced CT findings on clinical management, compared with PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and CT component.

Methods

One hundred thirty-two women previously treated for ovarian cancer underwent PET/CT consisting of non-enhanced and contrast-enhanced CT for suspected recurrence. PET/contrast enhanced CT, PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT, and enhanced CT were interpreted by two experienced radiologists by consensus for each investigation. Lesion status was determined on the basis of histopathology, radiological imaging, and clinical follow-up for longer than 6 months.

Results

Patient-based analysis showed that the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PET/contrast-enhanced CT were 78.8% (52 of 66), 90.9% (60 of 66), and 84.8% (112 of 132), respectively, whereas those of PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT were 74.2% (49 of 66), 90.9% (60 of 66), and 82.6% (109 of 132), respectively, and those of enhanced CT were 60.6% (40 of 66), 84.8% (56 of 66), and 72.7% (96 of 132), respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy differed significantly among the three modalities (Cochran Q test: p = 0.0001, p = 0.018, and p < 0.0001, respectively). The findings of PET/contrast-enhanced CT resulted in a change of management for 51 of the 132 patients (39%) and had an effect on patient management in 16 patients (12%) diagnosed by enhanced CT alone and three patients (2%) diagnosed by PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT.

Conclusion

Integrated PET/contrast-enhanced CT is an accurate modality for assessing ovarian cancer recurrence and led to changes in the subsequent appropriate therapy.

Bristow RE, Duska LR, Lambrou NC, Fishmann EK, O’Neill MJ, Trimble EL, et al. A model for predicting surgical outcome in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma using computed tomography. Cancer. 2000;89:1532–40.PubMedCrossRef

Cannistra SA. Cancer of the ovary. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2519–29.PubMedCrossRef

McGuire WP, Hoskins WJ, Brady MF, Kucera PR, Partridge EE, Look KY, et al. Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N Eng J Med. 1996;334:1–6.CrossRef

Dauplat J, Le Bouedec G, Pomel C, Scherer C. Cytoreductive surgery for advanced stages of ovarian cancer. Semin Surg Oncol. 2000;19:42–8.PubMedCrossRef

Grrenlee RT, Hill Harmon MB, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer statistics 2001. CA Cancer J Clin. 2001;51:15–36.CrossRef

Niloff JM, Bast RC Jr, Schaetzl EM, Knapp RC. Predictive value of CA 125 antigen levels in second-look procedures for ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985;151:981–6.PubMed

Rustin G, Tuxen M. Use of CA 125 in follow-up of ovarian cancer. Lancet. 1996;348:191–2.PubMedCrossRef

Rustin GJS, Marples M, Nelstrop AE, Mahmoudi M, Meyer T. Use of CA-125 to define progression of ovarian cancer in patients with persistently elevated levels. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:4054–7.PubMed

De Rosa V, Mangoni di Stefano ML, Brunetti A, Caraco C, Graziano R, Gallo MS, et al. Computed tomography and second-look surgery in ovarian cancer patients. Correlation, actual role and limitations of CT scan. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 1995;16:123–9.PubMed

10.

Ferrozzi F, Bova D, DeChiara F, Garlaschi G, Draghi F, Cocconi G, et al. Thin-section CT follow-up of metastatic ovarian carcinoma correlation with levels of CA-125 marker and clinical history. Clin Imag. 1998;22:364–70.CrossRef

11.

Topuz E, Aydiner A, Saip P, Eralp Y, Tas F, Salihoglu Y, et al. Correlation of serum CA125 level and computerized tomography (CT) imaging with laparotomic findings following intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with ovarian cancer. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2000;21:599–602.PubMed

12.

Funt SA, Hricak H, Abu-Rustum N, Mazumdar M, Felderman H, Chi DS. Role of CT in the management of recurrent ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182:393–8.PubMed

13.

Forstner R, Hricak H, Occhipinti KA, Powell CB, Frankel SD, Stern JL. Ovarian cancer: staging with CT and MR imaging. Radiology. 1995;19:619–26.

14.

Ricke J, Sehouli J, Hach C, Hanninen EL, Lichtenegger W, Felix R. Prospective evaluation of contrast-enhanced MRI in the depiction of peritoneal spread in primary or recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:943–9.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Low RN, Duggan B, Barone RM, Saleh F, Thomas Song SY. Treated ovarian cancer: MR imaging, laparotomy reassessment, and serum CA-125 values compared with clinical outcome at 1 year. Radiology. 2005;235:918–26.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Pannu HK, Bristow RE, Montz FJ, Fishman EK. Multidetector CT of peritoneal carcinomatosis from ovarian cancer. RadioGraphics. 2003;23:687–701.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Cook GJ, Maisey MN, Fogelman I. Normal variants, artifacts and interpretative pitfalls in PET imaging with 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose and carbon-11 methionine. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:1363–78.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Kostakoglu L, Agress Jr H, Goldsmith SJ. Clinical role of FDG PET in evaluation of cancer patients. Radiographics. 2003;23:315–40.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, Kinahan PE, Charron M, Roddy R, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369–79.PubMed

20.

Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, Gaitini D, Frenkel A, Kuten A, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1200–9.PubMed

21.

Zimmy M, Siggelkow W, Schroder W, Nowak B, Biemann S, Rath W, et al. 2-[Fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;83:310–5.CrossRef

22.

Rose PG, Faulhaber P, Miraldi F, Abdul-Karim FW. Positive emission tomography for evaluating a complete clinical response in patients with ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma: Correlation with second-look laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;82:17–21.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Chang WC, Hung YC, Kao CH, Yen RF, Shen YY, Lin CC. Usefulness of whole body positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) to detect recurrent ovarian cancer based to asymptomatically elevated serum levels of tumor marker (CA-125 antigen). Neoplasma. 2002;49:329–33.PubMed

24.

Lai CH, Huang KG, See LC, Yen TC, Tsai CS, Chang TC, et al. Restaging of recurrent cervical carcinoma with dual-phase [¹⁸F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography. Cancer. 2004;100:544–52.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, Zangheri B, Aletti G, Garevaglia E, et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: Correlation with histologic findings. Radiology. 2004;233:433–40.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Pannu HK, Cohade C, Bristow RE, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. PET-CT detection of abdominal recurrence of ovarian cancer: radiologic-surgical correlation. Abdom Imaging. 2004;39:398–403.

27.

Hauth EAM, Antoch G, Stattaus J, Kuehl H, Veit P, Bosckisch A, et al. Evaluation of integrated whole-body PET/CT in the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur J of Radiol. 2005;56:263–8.CrossRef

28.

Bristow RE, Giuntoli II RL, Pannu HK, Schulick RD, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Combined PET/CT for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer limited to retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;99:294–300.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Mangili G, Picchio M, Sironi S, Vigano R, Rabaiotti E, Bornaghi D, et al. Integrated PET/CT as a first-line re-staging modality in patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:658–66.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Thrall MM, DeLoia JA, Gallion H, Avril N. Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;105:17–22.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Chung HH, Kang WJ, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, Chung JK, et al. Role of [¹⁸F]FDG PET/CT in the assessment of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer: correlation with clinical or histological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:480–6.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Sebastian S, Lee SI, Horowitz NS, Scott JA, Fischman AJ, Simeone JF, et al. PET-CT vs. CT alone in ovarian cancer recurrence. Abdom Imaging. 2008;33:112–8.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Antoch G, Stattaus J, Nemat AT, Marnitz S, Beyer T, Kuehl H, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: Dual-modality PET/CT in preoperative staging. Radiology. 2003;229:526–33.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Antoch G, Saoudi N, Kuehl H, Dahmen G, Muller SP, Beyer T, et al. Accuracy of whole-body dual-modality fluorine-18–2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for tumor staging in solid tumors: comparison with CT and PET. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:4357–68.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Tempany CM, Zou KH, Silverman SG, Brown DL, Kurtz AB, McNeil BJ. Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities—report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology. 2000;215:761–7.PubMed

36.

Coleman ER, Delbeke D, Guiberteau MJ, Conti PS, Royal HD, Weinreb JC, et al. Concurrent PET/CT with an integrated imaging system: intersociety dialogue from the joint working group of the American College of Radiology, the Society of Nuclear Medicine, and the Society of Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1225–39.PubMed

37.

Cohade C, Wahl RL. Applications of positron emission tomography/computed tomography image fusion in clinical positron emission tomography: clinical use, interpretation methods, diagnostic improvements. Semi Nucl Med. 2003;33:228–37.CrossRef

38.

Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C, Taverna C, Seifert B, Stumpe KD, et al. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: coregistered FDG-PET and CT at staging and restaging-Do we need contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology. 2004;232:823–9.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Rodriguez-Vigil B, Gomez-Leon N, Pinilla I, Hernandez-Maraver D, Coya J, Martin-Curto L, et al. PET/CT in lymphoma: prospective study of enhanced full-dose PET/CT versus unenhanced low-dose PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1643–8.PubMed

40.

Mawlawi O, Erasmus JJ, Munden RF, Pan T, Knight A, Macapinlac HA, et al. Quantifying the effect of IV contrast media on integrated PET/CT: clinical evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:308–19.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Beyer T, Bockisch A, Debatin JF. To enhance or not to enhance? ¹⁸F-FDG and CT contrast agents in dual-modality ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:56–65.

42.

Pfannenberg AC, Aschoff P, Brechtel K, Muller M, Bares R, Paulsen F, et al. Low dose non-enhanced CT versus standard dose contrast-enhanced CT in combined PET/CT protocols for staging and therapy planning in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:36–44.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Pfannenberg AC, Aschoff P, Brechtel K, Muller M, Klein M, Bares R, et al. Value of contrast-enhanced multiphase CT in combined PET/CT protocols for oncological imaging. Br J Radiol. 2007;80:437–45.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Performance of integrated FDG–PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDG–PET/non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT
verfasst von: Kazuhiro Kitajima
Koji Murakami
Erena Yamasaki
Yasushi Domeki
Yasushi Kaji
Ichio Fukasawa
Noriyuki Inaba
Narufumi Suganuma
Kazuro Sugimura
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2008
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 8/2008
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0776-3

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2008

Tracking cellular stress with labeled FMAU reflects changes in mitochondrial TK2

68Ga- and 111In-labelled DOTA-RGD peptides for imaging of αvβ3 integrin expression

PET-CT—comments on the white paper

Is PET always an advantage versus planar and SPECT imaging?

Early prediction of response to therapy: the clinical implications in Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

Planar and SPECT imaging in the era of PET and PET–CT: can it survive the test of time?