Repeatability of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Prospective Assessment in 2 Multicenter Trials.

UNLABELLED: PET/CT with the glucose analog (18)F-FDG has several potential applications for monitoring tumor response to therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A prerequisite for many of these applications is detailed knowledge of the repeatability of quantitative parameters derived from (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies. METHODS: The repeatability of the (18)F-FDG signal was evaluated in 2 prospective multicenter trials. Patients with advanced NSCLC (tumor stage III-IV) underwent two (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies while not receiving therapy. Tumor (18)F-FDG uptake was quantified by measurement of the maximum standardized uptake value within a lesion (SUVmax) and the average SUV within a small volume of interest around the site of maximum uptake (SUVpeak). Analysis was performed for the lesion in the chest with the highest (18)F-FDG uptake and a size of at least 2 cm (target lesion) as well as for up to 6 additional lesions per patient. Repeatability was assessed by Bland-Altman plots and calculation of 95% repeatability coefficients (RCs) of the log-transformed SUV differences. RESULTS: Test-retest repeatability was assessed in 74 patients (34 from the ACRIN 6678 trial and 40 from the Merck MK-0646-008 trial). SUVpeak was 11.57 ± 7.89 g/mL for the ACRIN trial and 6.89 ± 3.02 for the Merck trial. The lower and upper RCs were -28% (95% confidence interval [CI], -35% to -23%) and +39% (95% CI, 31% to 54%) in the ACRIN trial, indicating that a decrease of SUVpeak by more than 28% or an increase by more than 39% has a probability of less than 2.5%. The corresponding RCs from the Merck trial were -35% (95% CI, -42% to -29%) and +53% (95% CI, 41% to 72%). Repeatability was similar for SUVmax of the target lesion, averaged SUVmax, and averaged SUVpeak of up to 6 lesions per patient. CONCLUSION: The variability of repeated measurements of tumor (18)F-FDG uptake in patients with NSCLC is somewhat larger than previously reported in smaller single-center studies but comparable to that of gastrointestinal malignancies in a previous multicenter trial. The variability of measurements supports the definitions of tumor response according to PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors.

CT colonography for the detection of nonpolypoid adenomas: sensitivity assessed with restricted national CT colonography trial criteria.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of nonpolypoid adenomas and the sensitivity of CT colonography (CTC) in their detection by use of the restricted criteria of height-to-width ratio<50% and height elevation≤3 mm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the National CT Colonography Trial (American College of Radiology Imaging Network protocol 6664), a cohort of 2531 participants without symptoms underwent CTC and screening colonoscopy. The CTC examinations were interpreted with both 2D and 3D techniques. Nonpolypoid adenomatous polyps identified with CTC or colonoscopy were retrospectively reviewed to determine which polyps met the restricted criteria. The prevalence of nonpolypoid adenomas and the prospective sensitivity of CTC were determined. Descriptive statistics were used to report the prevalence, size, and histologic features. The sensitivities (with 95% CIs) for nonpolypoid and polypoid lesions were compared by two-sided Z test for independent binomial proportions. RESULTS: The retrospective review confirmed 21 nonpolypoid adenomas, yielding a prevalence of 0.83% (21 of 2531 participants). Eight (38.1%) were advanced adenomas, many (50% [4/8]) only because of large size (≥10 mm). The overall per polyp sensitivity of CTC (combined 2D and 3D interpretation) for detecting nonpolypoid adenomas≥5 mm (n=21) was 0.76; ≥6 mm (n=16), 0.75; and ≥10 mm (n=5), 0.80. These values were not statistically different from the sensitivity of detecting polypoid adenomas (p>0.37). CONCLUSION: In this large screening population, nonpolypoid adenomas had a very low prevalence (<1%), and advanced pathologic features were uncommon in polyps<10 mm in diameter. Most nonpolypoid adenomas are technically visible at CTC. The prospective sensitivity is similar to that for polypoid adenomas when the interpretation combines both 2D and 3D review.

The National CT Colonography Trial: assessment of accuracy in participants 65 years of age and older.

PURPOSE: To conduct post-hoc analysis of National CT Colonography Trial data and compare the sensitivity and specificity of computed tomographic (CT) colonography in participants younger than 65 years with those in participants aged 65 years and older. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 2600 asymptomatic participants recruited at 15 centers for the trial, 497 were 65 years of age or older. Approval of this HIPAA-compliant study was obtained from the institutional review board of each site, and informed consent was obtained from each subject. Radiologists certified in CT colonography reported lesions 5 mm in diameter or larger. Screening detection of large (≥10-mm) histologically confirmed colorectal neoplasia was the primary end point; screening detection of smaller (6-9-mm) colorectal neoplasia was a secondary end point. The differences in sensitivity and specificity of CT colonography in the two age cohorts (age < 65 years and age ≥ 65 years) were estimated with bootstrap confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Complete data were available for 477 participants 65 years of age or older (among 2531 evaluable participants). Prevalence of adenomas 1 cm or larger for the older participants versus the younger participants was 6.9% (33 of 477) versus 3.7% (76 of 2054) (P < .004). For large neoplasms, mean estimates for CT colonography sensitivity and specificity among the older cohort were 0.82 (95% CI: 0.644, 0.944) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.779, 0.883), respectively. For large neoplasms in the younger group, CT colonography sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI: 0.837, 0.967) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.816, 0.899), respectively. Per-polyp sensitivity for large neoplasms for the older and younger populations was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.578, 0.869) and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.717, 0.924), respectively. For the older and younger groups, per-participant sensitivity was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.565, 0.854) and 0.81 (95% CI: 0.745, 0.882) for detecting adenomas 6 mm in diameter or larger. CONCLUSION: For most measures of diagnostic performance and in most subsets, the difference between senior-aged participants and those younger than 65 years was not statistically significant.

National CT colonography trial (ACRIN 6664): comparison of three full-laxative bowel preparations in more than 2500 average-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to compare the effect of three different full-laxative bowel preparations on patient compliance, residual stool and fluid, reader confidence, and polyp detection at CT colonography (CTC). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 2531 patients underwent CTC followed by colonoscopy for the American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) National CTC Trial. Of this total, 2525 patients used one of three bowel preparations with bisacodyl tablets and stool and fluid tagging: 4 L of polyethylene glycol (PEG); 90 mL of phosphosoda; or 300 mL of magnesium citrate. Patients reported percent compliance with the bowel preparation and radiologists graded each CTC examination for the amount of residual fluid and stool on a scale from 1 (none) to 4 (nondiagnostic). Reader confidence for true-positive findings was reported on a 5-point scale: 1 (low) to 5 (high). Sensitivity and specificity for detecting polyps ≥ 6 mm and ≥ 1 cm compared with colonoscopy were calculated for each preparation. RESULTS: The most commonly prescribed preparation was phosphosoda (n = 1403) followed by PEG (n = 1020) and magnesium citrate (n = 102). Phosphosoda had the highest patient compliance (p = 0.01), least residual stool (p < 0.001), and highest reader confidence versus PEG for examinations with polyps (p = 0.06). Magnesium citrate had significantly more residual fluid compared with PEG and phosphosoda (p = 0.006). The sensitivity and specificity for detecting colon polyps ≥ 6 mm and ≥ 1 cm did not differ significantly between preparations. CONCLUSION: Polyp detection was comparable for all three preparations, although phosphosoda had significantly higher patient compliance and the least residual stool.

ACRIN CT colonography trial: does reader's preference for primary two-dimensional versus primary three-dimensional interpretation affect performance?

PURPOSE: To determine whether the reader's preference for a primary two-dimensional (2D) or three-dimensional (3D) computed tomographic (CT) colonographic interpretation method affects performance when using each technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant study, images from 2531 CT colonographic examinations were interpreted by 15 trained radiologists by using colonoscopy as a reference standard. Through a survey at study start, study end, and 6-month intervals, readers were asked whether their interpretive preference in clinical practice was to perform a primary 2D, primary 3D, or both 2D and 3D interpretation. Readers were randomly assigned a primary interpretation method (2D or 3D) for each CT colonographic examination. Sensitivity and specificity of each method (primary 2D or 3D), for detecting polyps of 10 mm or larger and 6 mm or larger, based on interpretive preference were estimated by using resampling methods. RESULTS: Little change was observed in readers' preferences when comparing them at study start and study end, respectively, as follows: primary 2D (eight and seven readers), primary 3D (one and two readers), and both 2D and 3D (six and six readers). Sensitivity and specificity, respectively, for identifying examinations with polyps of 10 mm or larger for readers with a primary 2D preference (n = 1128 examinations) were 0.84 and 0.86, which was not significantly different from 0.84 and 0.83 for readers who preferred 2D and 3D (n = 1025 examinations) or from 0.76 and 0.82 for readers with a primary 3D preference (n = 378 examinations). When performance by using the assigned 2D or 3D method was evaluated on the basis of 2D or 3D preference, there was no difference among those readers by using their preferred versus not preferred method of interpretation. Similarly, no significant difference among readers or preferences was seen when performance was evaluated for detection of polyps of 6 mm or larger. CONCLUSION: The reader's preference for interpretive method had no effect on CT colonographic performance.

Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers.

BACKGROUND: Computed tomographic (CT) colonography is a noninvasive option in screening for colorectal cancer. However, its accuracy as a screening tool in asymptomatic adults has not been well defined. METHODS: We recruited 2600 asymptomatic study participants, 50 years of age or older, at 15 study centers. CT colonographic images were acquired with the use of standard bowel preparation, stool and fluid tagging, mechanical insufflation, and multidetector-row CT scanners (with 16 or more rows). Radiologists trained in CT colonography reported all lesions measuring 5 mm or more in diameter. Optical colonoscopy and histologic review were performed according to established clinical protocols at each center and served as the reference standard. The primary end point was detection by CT colonography of histologically confirmed large adenomas and adenocarcinomas (10 mm in diameter or larger) that had been detected by colonoscopy; detection of smaller colorectal lesions (6 to 9 mm in diameter) was also evaluated. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 2531 participants (97%). For large adenomas and cancers, the mean (+/-SE) per-patient estimates of the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve for CT colonography were 0.90+/-0.03, 0.86+/-0.02, 0.23+/-0.02, 0.99+/-<0.01, and 0.89+/-0.02, respectively. The sensitivity of 0.90 (i.e., 90%) indicates that CT colonography failed to detect a lesion measuring 10 mm or more in diameter in 10% of patients. The per-polyp sensitivity for large adenomas or cancers was 0.84+/-0.04. The per-patient sensitivity for detecting adenomas that were 6 mm or more in diameter was 0.78. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of asymptomatic adults, CT colonographic screening identified 90% of subjects with adenomas or cancers measuring 10 mm or more in diameter. These findings augment published data on the role of CT colonography in screening patients with an average risk of colorectal cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00084929; American College of Radiology Imaging Network [ACRIN] number, 6664.)

CT colonography: false-negative interpretations.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate if false-negative interpretations at computed tomographic (CT) colonography are due to observer error. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was HIPAA compliant and had institutional review board approval, with waiver of informed consent. An initial unblinded review of CT colonographic image data was used to generate reconciliation reports for all false-negative polyp candidates 6.0 mm or larger. These findings were then verified by two experienced readers. After reports from the original study and reconciliation reports were reviewed, errors were classified as observer (measurement or perceptual) errors, technical errors (eg, those caused by insufficient distention, fluid), or not reconcilable. Per-polyp and per-patient sensitivity values were calculated for adenomas 6.0 mm or larger in the original data set and again by assuming elimination of technical and observer errors. RESULTS: Of the original data set of 228 available polyps, 147 were adenomas; for this subgroup, the per-patient sensitivity was 70% and 68% at 10.0- and 6.0-mm thresholds, respectively. When all histologic types were considered, 114 polyps were false-negative findings. Of these, 53% (60 of 114) were attributed to observer-related errors, and 26% were attributed to errors classified as technical. After detailed retrospective reconciliation of individual polyps (so as to exclude any potentially correctable observer error), the per-polyp sensitivity of CT colonography for adenomas 10.0 mm or larger increased to 93%, and the per-patient sensitivity increased to 91%. When observer and technical errors were accounted for, eight (5.4%) of 147 adenomas 6.0 mm or larger could not be detected. If all technical errors and observer errors were scored as true-positive findings, the sensitivity for adenomas 6.0 mm or larger would have been 95% on both a per-polyp and a per-patient basis. CONCLUSION: The major contributor to error at CT colonography was observer perceptual error, while observer measurement error played a smaller role.

Congenital anomalies and normal variants of the pancreaticobiliary tract and the pancreas in adults: part 2, Pancreatic duct and pancreas.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to highlight the imaging features of congenital anomalies and normal variants of the pancreatic duct and the pancreas using contemporary imaging techniques such as MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), MRI, and helical CT. CONCLUSION: Congenital anomalies and normal variants of the pancreatic duct and the pancreas may be clinically significant and may create a diagnostic challenge. Recognition of the updated imaging features of these entities is important in clinical management and for avoiding misdiagnosis.

Prospective comparison of air-contrast barium enema and colonoscopy in patients with fecal occult blood: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The utility of air-contrast barium enema and colonoscopy for evaluation of the colon has been debated. Air-contrast barium enema is less expensive and invasive than colonoscopy, but it also is less sensitive and specific. Further, although air-contrast barium enema may be less painful than colonoscopy, it often is poorly tolerated by patients. Thus, this study compared the sensitivity and the specificity of air-contrast barium enema and colonoscopy for detection of colonic lesions in patients with fecal occult blood. METHODS: Over a 30-month period, patients with fecal occult blood were recruited. Patients underwent standard air-contrast barium enema, followed by colonoscopy 7 to 14 days later. Colonoscopists were blinded to the results of air-contrast barium enema until the colonoscopy was completed, after which the results were disclosed. If the findings were discrepant, colonoscopy was repeated. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were evaluated. Nine air-contrast barium enemas were reported to be inadequate, and the cecum was not intubated at colonoscopy in two patients. In the remaining patients, 5 cancers were identified (1 each cecum, transverse colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon, and rectum) by both studies. Sixty-six polypoid lesions were identified in 30 patients. Diverticula were identified in 42 patients by air-contrast barium enema and in 18 patients by colonoscopy. Air-contrast barium enema detected 3 of 36 polypoid lesions 5 mm or less in diameter, 5 of 15 adenomas 6 to 9 mm in size, and 4 of 15 adenomas 10 mm or greater in diameter (sensitivity 8%, 33%, and 27%, respectively). After excluding patients with diverticula, air-contrast barium enema detected 3 of 7 adenomas 10 mm or greater in size. Overall, 12 polypoid lesions or filling defects were identified by air-contrast barium enema that could not be verified by colonoscopy. The specificity of air-contrast barium enema for lesions 1.0 cm or greater in size was 100%; for those 6 mm or greater, it was 97%. CONCLUSIONS: Air-contrast barium enema accurately detects colon cancer and diverticula. Its sensitivity for detection of polypoid lesions or adenomas is poor and was confounded by the presence of diverticula.

Vascular tumors of the abdominal wall.

BACKGROUND: Vascular tumors of the abdominal wall are rare, benign congenital malformations that may cause pain or cosmetic disfigurement and are of significance for their ability to mimic more clinically aggressive tumors. There have been no previous reports of vascular tumors of the abdominal wall. This investigation reports the clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of three patients with vascular tumors of the abdominal wall. METHODS: Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) was used to identify feeding and draining vessels and to aid in operative planning for two patients; in a third patient, standard magnetic resonance imaging revealed the feeding vessels. RESULTS: MRA accurately identified the feeding and draining vessels and aided in operative planning, thus facilitating complete tumor resection. To date, patients have not experienced tumor recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: These cases suggest that MRA can be employed as a noninvasive imaging technique and should be the standard preoperative modality to plan the operative approach to vascular tumors of the abdominal wall.

Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: No multicenter study has been reported evaluating the performance and interobserver variability of computerized tomographic colonography. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of computerized tomographic colonography for detecting clinically important colorectal neoplasia (polyps >or=10 mm in diameter) in a multi-institutional study. METHODS: A retrospective study was developed from 341 patients who had computerized tomographic colonography and colonoscopy among 8 medical centers. Colonoscopy and pathology reports provided the standard. A random sample of 117 patients, stratified by criterion standard, was requested. Ninety-three patients were included (47% with polyps >or=10 mm; mean age, 62 years; 56% men; 84% white; 40% reported colorectal symptoms; 74% at increased risk for colorectal cancer). Eighteen radiologists blinded to the criterion standard interpreted computerized tomography colonography examinations, each using 2 of 3 different software display platforms. RESULTS: The average area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for identifying patients with at least 1 lesion >or=10 mm was 0.80 (95% lower confidence bound, 0.74). The average sensitivity and specificity were 75% (95% lower confidence bound, 68%) and 73% (95% lower confidence bound, 66%), respectively. Per-polyp sensitivity was 75%. A trend was observed for better performance with more observer experience. There was no difference in performance across software display platforms. CONCLUSIONS: Computerized tomographic colonography performance compared favorably with reported performance of fecal occult blood testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and barium enema. A prospective study evaluating the performance of computerized tomography colonography in a screening population is indicated.