Prognostic and diagnostic accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in 190 patients with carcinoma of unknown primary.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to determine the accuracy of [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET/CT in the search for the primary and the presence of a malignancy. The prognostic value of FDG-PET/CT information was tested. METHODS: A total of 190 patients were retrospectively analysed: 82 with histologically proven metastases (HPM) and 108 with clinical suspicion of the presence of a malignancy (CSM). The sensitivity and specificity were determined. Overall survival was calculated to evaluate the prognostic value of the FDG-PET/CT findings. RESULTS: In the search for the primary, the sensitivity and specificity were 62.0% and 81.9%, respectively. In the search for the presence of a malignancy, the sensitivity and specificity were 93.6% and 85.7%, respectively. Between the HPM and CSM groups, no significant difference in sensitivity and specificity was found either in the search for the primary or in the search for the presence of a malignancy. No significant difference in the sensitivity and specificity was found between 78 patients who were investigated by contrast-enhanced FDG-PET/CT and the remaining patients. A significantly shorter overall survival was found among patients with positive FDG-PET/CT findings compared with patients with negative findings (p = 0.00001); no significant difference in survival was found between the HPM and the CSM group (p = 0.770). CONCLUSION: FDG-PET/CT imaging is very helpful in the search for the presence of a malignancy in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary syndrome. FDG-PET/CT is less accurate in identifying exactly the site of a primary. Discovery of a hypermetabolic lesion was associated with the worst survival rate.

Langerhans cell histiocytosis with central nervous system involvement: follow-up by FDG-PET during treatment with cladribine.

The prognosis of patients with Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) involving the central nervous system (CNS) is generally poor, despite reports of clinical responses to chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation. We report on a patient with a 20-year history of relapsing multisystem LCH who developed progressive neuropsychiatric symptoms, including diplopia, ataxia, and mental deterioration. There was a regression of lesions in the brain stem and cerebellum following chemotherapy with cladribine (2-CdA) as evidenced by positron emission tomography (PET) scans. In conclusion, our experience is encouraging for the use of cladribine in CNS LCH. PET may be a useful modality for the monitoring of CNS disease activity in LCH and provides additional information in comparison with NMR imaging.

Routine (18)F-FDG PET preoperative staging of colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional staging and its impact on treatment decision making.

UNLABELLED: The preoperative staging of colorectal cancer (CRC) with (18)F-FDG PET is not as yet generally considered to be evidence based. We have found only 1 study that evaluated (18)F-FDG PET in a nonselected population with proven CRC. Several other studies have concentrated on more advanced disease. The aim of this study was to assess the potential clinical benefit of (18)F-FDG PET in the routine staging of CRC. METHODS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients who had had CRC histologically proven by colonoscopy underwent prospective preoperative staging by plain chest radiography, sonography, CT, and (18)F-FDG PET. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were retrospectively assessed by comparison with the histologic results after surgery (36 patients) or clinical follow-up (2 inoperable cases-both patients died within 1 y of the PET examination). The impact of (18)F-FDG PET on therapeutic decision making was evaluated by comparing medical records before and after (18)F-FDG PET. RESULTS: (18)F-FDG PET correctly detected 95% of primary tumors, whereas CT and sonography correctly detected only 49% and 14%, respectively. Lymph nodes were involved in 7 patients. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET were 29%, 88%, and 75%, respectively. CT and sonography did not reveal any lymph node involvement. Liver metastases were present in 9 patients. (18)F-FDG PET, CT, and sonography had a sensitivity of 78%, 67%, and 25%, respectively; a specificity of 96%, 100%, and 100%, respectively; and an accuracy of 91%, 91%, and 81%, respectively. (18)F-FDG PET revealed further lesions in 11 patients. Levels of carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 tumor markers were elevated in, respectively, only 33% and 8% of cases of proven CRC. (18)F-FDG PET changed the treatment modality for 8% and the range of surgery for 13% of patients. In total, (18)F-FDG PET changed the method of treatment for 16% of patients. CONCLUSION: Plain chest radiography and sonography did not bring any clinical benefits. No correlation was found between the level of tumor markers and the stage of disease. CT is necessary for confirmation of PET findings at extraabdominal sites (PET-guided CT) and for their morphologic specification at abdominal and pelvic sites before an operation. (18)F-FDG PET is the best method for the staging of CRC in all localities, despite the high rate of false-negative PET findings in patients with lymph node involvement. PET should be performed as a first examination after verification of CRC. We propose a PET/CT hybrid system as optimal in the staging of CRC.

Brain metastases after stereotactic radiosurgery using the Leksell gamma knife: can FDG PET help to differentiate radionecrosis from tumour progression?

Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) using the Leksell gamma knife promotes acute and chronic local changes in glucose metabolism. We have been able to find very few papers on Medline on the subject of assessment of metastases by 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy- D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) after SRS. The aim of this work was to specify the additional value of FDG PET, in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in differentiating SRS-induced radionecrosis from viable brain metastasis in a clinical setting. Fifty-seven metastases in 25 patients were treated by SRS. An average of 33 weeks later, all the patients underwent FDG PET. At the same time (SD=2 weeks) all the patients underwent MRI. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of both FDG PET and MRI examinations were calculated with reference to clinical and radiological follow-up or biopsies. The additional value derived from use of FDG PET after MRI was assessed and progression-free survival rates were compared. The difference in progression-free survival rates between the negative and positive subgroups was significant ( P=0.0005) for MRI and even more so ( P<0.00001) for FDG PET. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 75% (6/8), 93.9% (46/49) and 91.2% (52/57) for FDG PET, and 100% (8/8), 65.3% (32/49) and 70.2% (40/57) for MRI. In the subgroup of patients with positive or non-diagnostic MRI, the probability of presence of a viable tumour was only 32% (8/25). This probability increased to 100% (5/5) when subsequent FDG PET was positive and decreased to 11.1% (2/18) when FDG PET was negative. The frequency of a viable neoplasm was significantly different ( P=0.001) in the FDG PET negative and positive subgroups. MRI and FDG PET both have an important predictive value for persistent viable metastases after treatment by SRS. Neither sensitive but non-specific MRI nor specific but insensitive FDG PET is reliable on its own. While FDG PET significantly improved the diagnostic accuracy in the subgroup of patients with positive and non-diagnostic MRI, it provided no additional value in the MRI-negative subgroup.