The clinical advances of fluorine‐2‐D‐deoxyglucose – positron emission tomography/computed tomography in urological cancers

Fluorine‐18 labeled fluorine‐2‐D‐deoxyglucose (FDG) is the most frequently used positron emission tomography (PET) probe but it has certain limitations when used in urological cancers. The introduction of co‐registered PET and computed tomography (PET/CT) represents a major advance in technology and FDG‐PET/CT has now become the new standard. The diagnostic performance of FDG‐PET and PET/CT depends on the metabolic activity of tumor tissue, which is generally low in primary renal cell and prostate cancers and often in their metastatic deposits. In contrast, both seminomatous and nonseminomatous germ cell tumors are characterized by upregulated glucose metabolism with subsequently increased FDG uptake in tumor sites. Generally, the metabolic activity provides accurate information regarding the presence of a viable tumor, except in patients with residual mature teratoma. Although bladder cancer demonstrates sufficiently increased FDG uptake, primary tumors are difficult to identify due to the renal excretion of FDG. The accuracy of FDG‐PET/CT in metabolically active metastases is generally higher compared to conventional CT except for identifying small lung deposits. With disease progression and subsequent de‐differentiation of prostate cancer, castrate resistant disease is more likely to present with lesions that have increased glucose metabolism.     

High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression ("positron emission mammography") is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer

We sought to prospectively assess the diagnostic performance of a high-resolution positron emission tomography (PET) scanner using mild breast compression (positron emission mammography [PEM]). Data were collected on concomitant medical conditions to assess potential confounding factors. At four centers, 94 consecutive women with known breast cancer or suspicious breast lesions received 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) intravenously, followed by PEM scans. Readers were provided clinical histories and x-ray mammograms (when available). After excluding inevaluable cases and two cases of lymphoma, PEM readings were correlated with histopathology for 92 lesions in 77 women: 77 index lesions (42 malignant), 3 ipsilateral lesions (3 malignant), and 12 contralateral lesions (3 malignant). Of 48 cancers, 16 (33%) were clinically evident; 11 (23%) were ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), and 37 (77%) were invasive (30 ductal, 4 lobular, and 3 mixed; median size 21 mm). PEM depicted 10 of 11 (91%) DCIS and 33 of 37 (89%) invasive cancers. PEM was positive in 1 of 2 T1a tumors, 4 of 6 T1b tumors, 7 of 7 T1c tumors, and 4 of 4 cases where tumor size was not available (e.g., no surgical follow-up). PEM sensitivity for detecting cancer was 90%, specificity 86%, positive predictive value (PPV) 88%, negative predictive value (NPV) 88%, accuracy 88%, and area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (Az) 0.918. In three patients, cancer foci were identified only on PEM, significantly changing patient management. Excluding eight diabetic subjects and eight subjects whose lesions were characterized as clearly benign with conventional imaging, PEM sensitivity was 91%, specificity 93%, PPV 95%, NPV 88%, accuracy 92%, and Az 0.949 when interpreted with mammographic and clinical findings. FDG PEM has high diagnostic accuracy for breast lesions, including DCIS.     

Clinical use of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography for detection of renal cell carcinoma

PURPOSE: We evaluate the role of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) by retrospective review. To our knowledge this series is the largest reviewing the use of PET in patients with RCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 66 patients who underwent 90 PET scans for suspected or known RCC were identified. Dictated reports of PET, chest computerized tomography (CT), abdominal/pelvic CT and bone scan were examined with confirmation of results by histopathology or followup of at least 1 year. The accuracies of PET and conventional imaging modalities were compared. RESULTS: PET exhibited a sensitivity of 60% and specificity of 100% for primary RCC tumors (abdominal CT demonstrated 91.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity). For retroperitoneal lymph node metastases and/or renal bed recurrence, PET was 75.0% sensitive and 100.0% specific (92.6% sensitivity and 98.1% specificity for abdominal CT). PET had a sensitivity of 75.0% and a specificity of 97.1% for metastases to the lung parenchyma compared to 91.1% and 73.1%, respectively, for chest CT. PET had a sensitivity of 77.3% and specificity of 100.0% for bone metastases, compared to 93.8% and 87.2% for combined CT and bone scan. In 39 scans (32 patients) PET failed to detect RCC lesions identified by conventional imaging. CONCLUSIONS: The role of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 PET in the detection of RCC is limited by low sensitivity. With superior specificity PET may have a complementary role as a problem solving tool in cases that are equivocal on conventional imaging.     

Value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in characterizing clinically‐significant thyroid carcinomas

Background: Despite the rising incidence of thyroid incidentalomas, their clinical significance remains unclear. The present study aimed to determine whether fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG‐PET) is associated with a significantly higher risk of clinically‐significant thyroid carcinoma (CSC) in incidentalomas than other non‐functional imaging modalities. Methods: Over a 2‐year period, 89 patients were identified as having a thyroid incidentaloma. All patients had either surgery or fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) with a 12‐month follow up to confirm the nature of the incidentaloma. Surgery was carried out for nodules with malignant or indeterminate FNAC result, or those with in a retrosternal location, with size > 4 cm or local symptoms. Results: A total of 21 (23.6%) patients had their incidentaloma detected by FDG‐PET (PET group) and 68 (76.4%) by non‐PET imaging modalities (non‐PET group). Differentiated thyroid carcinoma was confirmed in 18 (20.2%) patients. The rate of malignancy was 61.9% in the PET group and 7.4% in the non‐PET group (P = 0.001). After excluding the occult microcarcinomas, the risk of malignancy reduced to 14.6%, but the difference in malignancy rate became more marked between the PET and non‐PET group (42.9% vs 2.9%, P = 0.001). The maximum standardized uptake value on FDG‐PET was similar between benign and malignant lesions (P = 0.124). Conclusion: The overall risk of CSC in thyroid incidentalomas was 14.6%. Those detected by FDG‐PET were significantly more likely to harbour CSC than those by non‐functional modalities. Incidentalomas with focal FDG uptake should be thoroughly investigated with USG and FNAC.     

Update on positron emission tomography for imaging of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common non‐cutaneous malignancy among men in the Western world, and continues to be a major health problem. Imaging has recently become more important in the clinical management of prostate cancer patients, including diagnosis, staging, choice of optimal treatment strategy, treatment follow up and restaging. Positron emission tomography, a functional and molecular imaging technique, has opened a new field in clinical oncological imaging. The most common positron emission tomography radiotracer, ¹⁸F‐fluorodeoxyglucose, has been limited in imaging of prostate cancer. Recently, however, other positron emission tomography tracers, such as ¹¹C‐acetate and ¹¹C‐ or ¹⁸F‐choline, have shown promising results. In the present review article, we overview the potential and current use of positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging employing the four most commonly used positron emission tomography radiotracers, ¹⁸F‐fluorodeoxyglucose, ¹¹C‐acetate and ¹¹C‐ or ¹⁸F‐choline, for imaging evaluation of prostate cancer.     

Clinical significance of incidental focal colorectal 18F‐fluorodeoxyglucose uptake: our experience and a review of the literature

Aim The aims of the present study were: (i) to evaluate the focal incidental colorectal uptake of ¹⁸F‐fluorodeoxyglucose ([¹⁸F]FDG) and to correlate it with colonoscopy and histological findings; (ii) to evaluate the relationship between the presence/absence of neoplastic disease and clinical data and the anatomical site of [¹⁸F]FDG uptake; and (iii) to compare our results with those reported for incidental colorectal uptake of [¹⁸F]FDG in the literature and those obtained from various screening programmes for colorectal cancer. Method The database of 6000 patients referred for [¹⁸F]FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET‐CT) to our centre was retrospectively reviewed for incidental colorectal uptake of [¹⁸F]FDG. Patients with focal uptake were selected and the aetiology of PET findings was verified with a subsequent colonoscopy and histopathological analysis when available. Results Incidental colorectal uptake of [¹⁸F]FDG was seen in 144 (2.4%) patients, of whom 64 (1.1%) had focal uptake; 48 out of these 64 patients underwent colonoscopy, which showed malignant tumours in 12 (25%), premalignant lesions in 19 (40%), non‐neoplastic lesions in six (12%) and lesions not confirmed by colonoscopy in 11 (23%). Our data agreed with previously published data. Statistical analysis did not show any significant relationship between the presence/absence of neoplastic disease and patient sex or age, type of primary disease and anatomical site of [¹⁸F]FDG uptake. Comparing our data with various screening programmes, a significant difference was found only with series in which colonoscopy was performed in patients at high risk for colorectal cancer. Conclusion Focal incidental colorectal uptake of [¹⁸F]FDG is observed in about 1% of PET/CT studies and carries a high risk of neoplastic disease. A PET‐CT report should suggest colonoscopy when abnormal findings are reported.     

18F-FDGPET/CT与传统影像检查寻找骨转移瘤原发灶的比较

[目的]比较18F-FDG PET/CT与传统影像检查(胸片、彩超、CT及MRI等)为骨转移瘤患者寻找原发灶的临床价值.[方法]回顾性分析37例于2008年5月～2010年6月间本中心收治的经病理证实的骨转移瘤患者的病例资料,并随访其后续的诊治情况.以病理结果或临床随访作为原发灶确认标准.并将PET/CT与传统影像检查对原发灶的检出情况进行比较.且对治疗方案的调整进行汇总.[结果]37例患者中,PET/CT提示原发灶28例,其中正确检出原发灶27例(73％),1例为假阳性;传统影像检查正确检出原发灶17例(46％),两者原发灶正确检出率的差异有显著性(x2=5.61,P=0.018).27例经PET/CT正确检出原发灶的病例中,17例(63％)采取了针对原发灶的治疗措施.此外9例PET/CT未提示原发灶的患者中,3例经病理证实为假阴性.[结论]与传统影像检查相比,18F-FDG PET/CT可更有效、更便捷的找出骨转移瘤患者原发灶,进而为制定更合理的治疗方案提供依据.     

Positron‐emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in the initial staging of primary rectal cancer

Objective The aim of this study was to assess the role of ¹⁸flourodeoxyglucose positron‐emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in the initial staging of primary rectal adenocarcinoma. Method A total of 20 patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum were assessed with both PET/CT and conventional staging (CT chest/abdomen/pelvis, MRI rectum). Discordance with conventional imaging and incidental findings on PET were recorded and the patients presented to a colorectal cancer multidisciplinary team to assess management changes. Patients were followed up so that discordant or incidental findings could be verified by intra‐operative examination, imaging or histology where possible. Results Positron‐emission tomography/computed tomography correctly identified the primary tumour in all 20 patients. Comparing PET/CT with conventional staging modalities, there were 11 discordant or incidental findings in nine patients (45%). This resulted in a potential change in stage in 30% (four patients downstaged and two upstaged). PET/CT suggested additional neoplastic pathology in three patients and excluded the same in two patients. The incidental neoplastic findings were of minor clinical significance and one was eventually deemed false positive. While PET/CT resulted in potential management changes in five patients (25%), no changes in surgical management occurred. When tumours were grouped according to conventional stage, PET/CT resulted in fewer changes in stage in stage I (0%), compared with stages II to IV (43%) (P = 0.08). Conclusion Positron‐emission tomography/computed tomography provides additional information to conventional staging in primary rectal cancer. This information produced minor management changes in this study and did not effect surgical management. PET/CT may be most appropriately used selectively in more advanced stages and where indeterminate findings exist with conventional staging.