Literature DB >> 12394190

18-FDG PET scan in the staging of recurrent melanoma: additional value and therapeutic impact.

M Stas1, S Stroobants, P Dupont, M Gysen, L Van Hoe, M Garmyn, L Mortelmans, I De Wever.   

Abstract

Staging of melanoma patients by means of whole body functional imaging in a single evaluation session using positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18- labelled deoxy-d-glucose (FDG) as a metabolic tracer has created much interest over the last decade. After enthusiastic pilot studies, more attention has been paid to the false-negative and false-positive results of this technique than to its true therapeutic impact. This study aimed to evaluate (1) the sensitivity and specificity of this technique at a single lesion level compared with conventional screening procedures (CSP) - both of these accompanied by careful clinical examination; and (2) the additional value of the PET scan at the level of the individual patient and its therapeutic impact for different types of melanoma recurrence. A consecutive series of 100 PET scans performed on 84 melanoma patients with regional or distant recurrence according to CSP (89 PET scans) or suspicion of recurrence, i.e. inconclusive CSP (11 PET scans), were retrospectively analysed and compared with the CSP results. At the single lesion level, PET scan and CSP showed a sensitivity of 85 and 81%, a specificity of 90 and 87% and an accuracy of 88 and 84%, respectively. PET provided false-negative results for small skin metastases and brain involvement; false-positive results were associated with unrelated benign or malignant tumours and peripheral soft tissue and bone uptake. PET scan showed an additional value over and above CSP at the individual patient's level by true upstaging in 10 cases, true downstaging in 24 cases and depiction of more lesions within the same stage of disease in 15 cases. The overall therapeutic impact reached 26%: 17 out of 71 (24%) cases with regional recurrence, one out of 18 cases (5.5%) with distant metastasis and eight out of 11 cases (73%) with suspicion of recurrence where CSP remained doubtful. However, in 19 cases comparison between CSP and PET resulted in discordant findings, suggesting upstaging in one area and downstaging at another site within the same patient. In conclusion, PET scan has an additional value in the staging of recurrent melanoma, providing it is accompanied by careful clinical examination and specific brain imaging. However, in the absence of evidence of metastasis or unrelated conditions at the same site on CSP, PET spots may represent false-positive images, which would falsely upgrade a patient to an incurable state, or they may be early true-positive findings, which will become evident during close follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12394190     DOI: 10.1097/00008390-200209000-00010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Melanoma Res        ISSN: 0960-8931            Impact factor:   3.599


  14 in total

1.  Whole body PET/CT imaging for detection of metastatic choroidal melanoma.

Authors:  P T Finger; M Kurli; P Wesley; L Tena; K R Kerr; A Pavlick
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Selected patients with metastatic melanoma may benefit from liver resection.

Authors:  Paulo Herman; Marcel Autran C Machado; André Luis Montagnini; Luiz A C D'Albuquerque; William A Saad; Marcel C C Machado
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  A new animal model for the imaging of melanoma: correlation of FDG PET with clinical outcome, macroscopic aspect and histological classification in Melanoblastoma-bearing Libechov Minipigs.

Authors:  Raphaël Boisgard; Silvia Vincent-Naulleau; Jean-Jacques Leplat; Stephan Bouet; Catherine Le Chalony; Yves Tricaud; Vratislav Horak; Claudine Geffrotin; Gérard Frelat; Bertrand Tavitian
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-04-08       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Impact of 2-deoxy-2[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose Positron Emission Tomography on the management of patients with advanced melanoma.

Authors:  Marion T Harris; Salvatore U Berlangieri; Jonathan S Cebon; Ian D Davis; Andrew M Scott
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2005 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 5.  [Therapy of malignant melanoma. First-, second- and pathogenesis-oriented third-line therapies].

Authors:  K Rass; D Tadler; W Tilgen
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.751

6.  Contemporary diagnostic imaging modalities for the staging and surveillance of melanoma patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yan Xing; Yulia Bronstein; Merrick I Ross; Robert L Askew; Jeffrey E Lee; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Richard Royal; Janice N Cormier
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Imaging of gastrointestinal melanoma metastases: Correlation with surgery and histopathology of resected specimen.

Authors:  Ahmed E Othman; Thomas K Eigentler; Georg Bier; Christina Pfannenberg; Hans Bösmüller; Christian Thiel; Claus Garbe; Konstantin Nikolaou; Bernhard Klumpp
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-10-17       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Ultrasound, CT, MRI, or PET-CT for staging and re-staging of adults with cutaneous melanoma.

Authors:  Jacqueline Dinnes; Lavinia Ferrante di Ruffano; Yemisi Takwoingi; Seau Tak Cheung; Paul Nathan; Rubeta N Matin; Naomi Chuchu; Sue Ann Chan; Alana Durack; Susan E Bayliss; Abha Gulati; Lopa Patel; Clare Davenport; Kathie Godfrey; Manil Subesinghe; Zoe Traill; Jonathan J Deeks; Hywel C Williams
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-07-01

Review 9.  PET/CT in oncology: for which tumours is it the reference standard?

Authors:  Conor D Collins
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 3.909

10.  Meta-analysis of the performance of (18)F-FDG PET in cutaneous melanoma.

Authors:  Felisa Jiménez-Requena; Roberto C Delgado-Bolton; Cristina Fernández-Pérez; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Judy Schwimmer; José M Pérez-Vázquez; José L Carreras-Delgado
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-09-02       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.