RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Positron emission tomography (PET) was evaluated in low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) to determine its impact on staging and management and to compare PET and gallium scans. METHODS: PET resulted in management plan changes in 74 patients with untreated low-grade NHL stages I to III. Patient outcomes to 12 months were documented. RESULTS: PET identified additional lesions in 50% of patients, led to a change in stage in 32%, and had a significant impact on management in 34%. Inferior progression-free survival was noted in patients with additional lesions detected by PET (p=0.001) and in the 28% of patients upstaged by PET to stage III or IV (p=0.024). In a subset of 16 patients undergoing both PET and gallium scans, PET was found to be superior. CONCLUSION: PET has a major role in the management of low-grade NHL in addition to its proven role in aggressive lymphoma.
Asunto(s)
Radioisótopos de Galio , Linfoma no Hodgkin/diagnóstico por imagen , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Radioisótopos de Flúor , Fluorodesoxiglucosa F18 , Humanos , Linfoma no Hodgkin/patología , Estadificación de Neoplasias/métodos , Pronóstico , Estudios Prospectivos , Radiofármacos , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
UNLABELLED: The primary aim of this study was to determine the impact of PET in changing initial management plans in patients with untreated head and neck cancer. Secondary aims were to determine the incremental staging information provided by PET and to document the effect of PET on treatment outcomes. METHODS: Patients with untreated head and neck cancer underwent PET scans. Pre-PET management plans were documented by referring clinicians unaware of the PET results, and management plan changes due to PET scan findings were documented. Follow-up to 12 mo after treatment was performed to determine actual management and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients (median age, 56 y; 69% male) were studied. PET scans resulted in management change in 33.8% of patients. Moreover, PET was able to detect additional sites of disease in 39.4% of patients. Follow-up data showed that PET improved the classification of patients into curative and palliative categories. Trends toward inferior disease-free survival and lower complete response rates in patients with additional lesions detected on PET were demonstrated. In addition, a trend toward inferior disease-free survival in patients with a higher maximum standardized uptake value was shown. CONCLUSION: These data unequivocally demonstrate the significant impact of PET on management and outcomes in patients with untreated head and neck cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de Cabeza y Cuello/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de Cabeza y Cuello/terapia , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias/métodos , Estudios Prospectivos , Radiofármacos , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
UNLABELLED: The aims of our study were to examine the impact of PET in changing management in patients with proven or suspected colorectal cancer recurrence and to assess the impact of management change on disease-free survival. METHODS: Symptomatic patients with a residual structural lesion suggestive of recurrent tumor (group A) or patients with pulmonary or hepatic metastases considered to be potentially resectable (group B) underwent PET scans. Pre-PET management plans were documented by referring clinicians unaware of the PET results, and follow-up to 12 mo was performed to determine actual management and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients (118 men and 73 women; mean age, 66 y) were studied. PET detected additional sites of disease in 48.4% of patients in group A and in 43.9% of patients in group B. A change in planned management was documented in 65.6% of group A and in 49.0% of group B patients. These management plans were implemented in 96% of patients. Follow-up data in group A showed progressive disease in 60.5% of patients with additional lesions detected by PET, compared with conventional imaging, and in 36.2% of patients with no additional lesions detected by PET (P=0.04). In group B, progressive disease was identified in 65.9% of patients with additional lesions detected by PET and in 39.2% of patients with no additional lesions detected by PET (P=0.01). PET also provided valuable prognostic information on patients stratified into curative- or palliative-intent groups. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate the significant impact of PET on management and outcomes in patients with suspected recurrent colorectal cancer.