Abstract
Abstract
Background
We assess the usefulness of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detection of recurrent or residual tumor in post treatment patients with NSCLC and comparing the results with CECT, and we evaluate its impact to the clinical assessment and overall survival of lung cancer patients.
Results
A prospective study of 63 patients with potentially resectable NSCLC, were divided into 2 groups according to the initial staging of the disease and the early response to treatment.
Group A (n=29) patients were treated by curative treatment, and group B (n=34) patients were treated by palliative treatment.
Evaluation of patients was done during the follow-up period clinically every 3 months and by 18F-FDG PET/CT and CECT imaging at 6 months intervals.
In group A, 18F-FDG PET/CT correctly diagnosed all recurrent or residual tumors (n=7) whereas CECT diagnosed only 5 with 2 false negative cases.
In group B, 18F-FDG PET/CT correctly diagnosed all recurrent or residual tumors (n=23) whereas CECT diagnosed 16 patients with 7 false negative cases.
By comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and CECT in detection of residual or recurrent lung cancer (n=30), the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT were 100%, 92%, 92%, 100%, and 96% respectively, while of CECT were 72%, 95%, 94%, 79%, and 84% respectively in correlation with reference standard data. The calculated SUV max ranged from 2.1 to 4.9.
There was a significant difference in overall survival between patients in routine scan who had positive 18F FDG PET/CT result (median survival 18 months) and those who had negative result (median survival 45 months) (P<0.0001).
Conclusion
18 F-FDG PET/CT plays an important role in distinguishing post treatment changes from tumor recurrence in patients with lung cancer. Follow-up or surveillance 18 F-FDG PET/CT is a prognostic indicator for overall survival of patients.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging
Reference15 articles.
1. Detterbeck FC, Boffa DJ, Kim AW et al (2017) The eighth edition lung cancer stage classification. Chest 151(1):193–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.010 Epub 2016 Oct 22. PMID: 27780786
2. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2012, lung cancer. National Cancer Institute website (2015) seer.cancer.gov/archive/csr/1975_2012/. Updated November 18, 2015. Accessed 13 Sept 2016 [Google Scholar]
3. Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aggarwal C et al. (2019) NCCN guidelines insights: non-small cell lung cancer, Version 1.2020 J Natl Compr Canc Netw. (12):1464-1472. doi: https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2019.0059. PMID: 31805526.
4. Osman AM, Korashi HI (2020) PET/CT implication on bronchogenic carcinoma TNM staging and follow-up using RECIST/PERCIST criteria: a comparative study with CT. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 51:16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43055-020-0133-5
5. Veenstra CM, Vachani A, Ciunci CA et al (2016) Trends in the use of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging in surveillance of non-small-cell lung and colorectal cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 13:491–496 [Crossref] [Medline] [Google Scholar]
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献