Dataset Information

FDG PET/CT in cancer: comparison of actual use with literature-based recommendations.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The Region of Southern Denmark (RSD), covering 1.2 of Denmark's 5.6 million inhabitants, established a task force to (1) retrieve literature evidence for the clinical use of positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and provide consequent recommendations and further to (2) compare the actual use of PET/CT in the RSD with these recommendations. This article summarizes the results.

Methods

A Work Group appointed a professional Subgroup which made Clinician Groups conduct literature reviews on six selected cancers responsible for 5,768 (62.6 %) of 9,213 PET/CT scans in the RSD in 2012. Rapid Evidence Assessment was applied, using the methodology of systematic reviews with predefined limitations to search PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for articles published in English/Danish/Swedish/Norwegian since 2002. PICO questions were defined, data recorded and quality appraised and rated with regard to strength and evidence level. Consequent recommendations for applications of PET/CT were established. The actual use of PET/CT was compared with these, where grades A and B indicated "established" and "useful" and grades C and D "potentially useful" and "non-recommendable" indications, respectively.

Results

Of 11,729 citations, 1,729 were considered for review, and 204 were included. The evidence suggested usefulness of PET/CT in lung, lymphoma, melanoma, head and neck, and colorectal cancers, whereas evidence was sparse in gynaecological cancers. The agreement between actual use of PET/CT and literature-based recommendations was high in the first five mentioned cancers in that 96.2 % of scans were made for grade A or B indications versus only 22.2 % in gynaecological cancers.

Conclusion

Evidence-based usefulness was reported in five of six selected cancers; evidence was sparse in the sixth, gynaecological cancers. Actual use of PET/CT agreed well with recommendations.

SUBMITTER: Petersen H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4764641 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

FDG PET/CT in cancer: comparison of actual use with literature-based recommendations.

Petersen Henrik H Holdgaard Paw Christian PC Madsen Poul Henning PH Knudsen Lene Meldgaard LM Gad Dorte D Gravergaard Anders Eggert AE Rohde Max M Godballe Christian C Engelmann Bodil Elisabeth BE Bech Karsten K Teilmann-Jørgensen Dorte D Mogensen Ole O Karstoft Jens J Johansen Jørgen J Christensen Janne Buck JB Johansen Allan A Høilund-Carlsen Poul Flemming PF

European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 20151030 4

<h4>Purpose</h4>The Region of Southern Denmark (RSD), covering 1.2 of Denmark's 5.6 million inhabitants, established a task force to (1) retrieve literature evidence for the clinical use of positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and provide consequent recommendations and further to (2) compare the actual use of PET/CT in the RSD with these recommendations. This article summarizes the results.<h4>Methods</h4>A Work Group appointed a professional Subgroup which made Clinician Groups conduct literat ...[more]

PMID: 26519292

Similar Datasets

Project description:Despite improvements in treatments, metastatic breast cancer remains difficult to cure. Bones constitute the most common site of first-time recurrence, occurring in 40-75% of cases. Therefore, evaluation for possible osseous metastases is crucial. Technetium 99 ((99)Tc) bone scintigraphy and fluorodexossyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (PET-CT) are the most commonly used techniques to assess osseous metastasis. PET magnetic resonance (PET-MR) imaging is an innovative technique still under investigation. We compared the capability of PET-MR to that of same-day PET-CT to assess osseous metastases in patients with breast cancer.One hundred and nine patients with breast cancer, who underwent same-day contrast enhanced (CE)-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR, were evaluated. CE-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR studies were interpreted by consensus by a radiologist and a nuclear medicine physician. Correlations with prior imaging and follow-up studies were used as the reference standard. Binomial confidence intervals and a χ(2) test were used for categorical data, and paired t-test was used for the SUVmax data; a non-informative prior Bayesian approach was used to estimate and compare the specificities.Osseous metastases affected 25 out 109 patients. Metastases were demonstrated by CE-PET-CT in 22 out of 25 patients (88%±7%), and by CE-PET-MR in 25 out of 25 patients (100%). CE-PET-CT revealed 90 osseous metastases and CE-PET-MR revealed 141 osseous metastases (P<0.001). The estimated sensitivity of CE-PET-CT and CE-PET-MR were 0.8519 and 0.9630, respectively. The estimated specificity for CE-FDG-PET-MR was 0.9884. The specificity of CE-PET-CT cannot be determined from patient-level data, because CE-PET-CT yielded a false-positive lesion in a patient who also had other, true metastases.CE-PET-MR detected a higher number of osseous metastases than did same-day CE-PET-CT, and was positive for 12% of the patients deemed osseous metastasis-negative on the basis of CE-PET-CT.

Project description:BackgroundWe assessed and compared image quality obtained with clinical 18F-FDG whole-body oncologic PET protocols used in three different, state-of-the-art digital PET/CT and two conventional PMT-based PET/CT devices. Our goal was to evaluate an improved trade-off between administered activity (patient dose exposure/signal-to-noise ratio) and acquisition time (patient comfort) while preserving diagnostic information achievable with the recently introduced digital detector technology compared to previous analogue PET technology.MethodsWe performed list-mode (LM) PET acquisitions using a NEMA/IEC NU2 phantom, with activity concentrations of 5?kBq/mL and 25?kBq/mL for the background (9.5?L) and sphere inserts, respectively. For each device, reconstructions were obtained varying the image statistics (10, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 300?s from LM data) and the number of iterations (range 1 to 10) in addition to the employed local clinical protocol setup. We measured for each reconstructed dataset: the quantitative cross-calibration, the image noise on the uniform background assessed by the coefficient of variation (COV), and the recovery coefficients (RCs) evaluated in the hot spheres. Additionally, we compared the characteristic time-activity-product (TAP) that is the product of scan time per bed position × mass-activity administered (in min·MBq/kg) across datasets.ResultsGood system cross-calibration was obtained for all tested datasets with <?6% deviation from the expected value was observed. For all clinical protocol settings, image noise was compatible with clinical interpretation (COV?<?15%). Digital PET showed an improved background signal-to-noise ratio as compared to conventional PMT-based PET. RCs were comparable between digital and PMT-based PET datasets. Compared to PMT-based PET, digital systems provided comparable image quality with lower TAP (from ~?40% less and up to 70% less).ConclusionsThis study compared the achievable clinical image quality in three state-of-the-art digital PET/CT devices (from different vendors) as well as in two conventional PMT-based PET. Reported results show that a comparable image quality is achievable with a TAP reduction of ~?40% in digital PET. This could lead to a significant reduction of the administered mass-activity and/or scan time with direct benefits in terms of dose exposure and patient comfort.

Project description:Purpose Fluorine-18 (18F)-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and gallium-68 (68Ga)-somatostatin analog (SSA) PET/CT imaging have been increasingly used in ectopic adrenocorticotropic hormone syndrome (EAS); however, the diagnostic efficacies of these two methods in patients with EAS remain unclear. Our study aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacies of 18F-FDG PET/CT and 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT in EAS. Methods The clinical and imaging data of 68 patients with EAS who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT and 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT examinations from December 2016 to April 2021 were analyzed retrospectively, and the diagnostic efficacies of these methods were compared. Results In 37 cases, imaging was performed to locate the primary tumor lesion (localization group), and in 31 to evaluate tumor load or metastasis (staging group). Primary tumors were detected in 48.65% (18/37) of the localization group patients. According to scan-based analysis, the tumor lesion detection rates and false positive rates of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging and 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT imaging were 18.92% vs. 45.95% (p < 0.05) and 21.62% vs. 2.70% (p < 0.05) respectively. For lesion-based analysis, the tumor lesion detection rates and false positive rates were 24.13% vs. 58.62% (p >0.05) and 31.04% vs. 3.45% (p < 0.05). In 90.32% (28/31) of the staging group patients, 286 of 292 lesions were confirmed as tumor lesions. Based on scan analysis, the detection rates and false positive rates of 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging and 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT imaging were 83.87% vs. 67.74% (p > 0.05) and 12.90% vs. 9.68% (p > 0.05) respectively. Based on lesion analysis, the detection rate and false positive rates were 93.84% vs. 54.80% (p < 0.05) and 1.37% vs. 1.03%(p > 0.05). Conclusion 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT imaging may be more suitable than 18F-FDG PET/CT for identifying the primary tumor in patients with EAS, while 18F-FDG PET/CT may be more advantageous than 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT for patients with suspected metastasis.

Dataset Information

FDG PET/CT in cancer: comparison of actual use with literature-based recommendations.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

FDG PET/CT in cancer: comparison of actual use with literature-based recommendations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets