Literature DB >> 17320575

The utility of positron emission tomography in staging of potentially operable carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus: results of the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0060 trial.

Bryan F Meyers1, Robert J Downey, Paul A Decker, Robert J Keenan, Barry A Siegel, Robert J Cerfolio, Rodney J Landreneau, Carolyn E Reed, Dennis M Balfe, Farrokh Dehdashti, Karla V Ballman, Valerie W Rusch, Joe B Putnam.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z0060 is a prospective multi-institutional trial with a primary objective to evaluate whether positron emission tomography (PET) with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) detects evidence of metastastic disease that precludes esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer who are surgical candidates after routine staging.
METHODS: Patients with resectable, biopsy-proven carcinoma were enrolled after computed tomography of chest and abdomen demonstrated no evidence of metastasis. FDG-PET was performed according to specified standards. FDG-PET findings suggesting metastases required confirmation and patients without metastases on PET were expected to proceed to surgery.
RESULTS: A total of 262 patients were registered. Of these, 199 were deemed eligible and of these, 189 patients were evaluable. Seventy-three patients were ineligible or unevaluable. Reasons for ineligibility included nonresectable disease by routine staging (39), missing or outdated staging procedures (12), PET technical protocol violations (10), no cancer (4), pre-PET induction therapy (3), claustrophobia (1), and other causes (4). There were 145 (78%) patients who went on to have surgery, 42 (22%) who did not, and 2 patients for whom the surgical status was not determined. The reasons for no resection included the following: M1 disease found by PET and confirmed (9), M1 disease found by PET and not confirmed (2), M1 disease at exploration not found by PET (7), decline or death before surgery (10), patient refusal of surgery (7), unresectable local tumor at exploration (5), and extensive N1 disease precluding operation (2). Eight (4.2%) patients undergoing resection had a recurrence in the first 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Although 22% of eligible patients did not undergo esophagectomy, FDG-PET after standard clinical staging for esophageal carcinoma identified confirmed M1b disease in at least 4.8% (95% confidence interval: 2.2%-8.9%) of patients before resection. Unconfirmed PET evidence of M1 disease and regional adenopathy (N1 disease) led to definitive nonsurgical or induction therapy in additional patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17320575     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.09.079

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  28 in total

1.  The role of integrated F-18-FDG-PET scanning in the detection of M1 disease in oesophageal adenocarcinoma and impact on clinical management.

Authors:  Soumil Vyas; Sheraz R Markar; Lydia Iordanidou; Samantha Read; David Stoker; Majid Hashemi; Ian Mitchell; Mark Winslet; Jamshed Bomanji
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Predicting response to chemoradiotherapy in rectal and oesophageal cancer with 18F-FDG: prognostic value and possible role in patient management.

Authors:  Elif Hindié; Christophe Hennequin; Jean-luc Moretti
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Update: modern approaches to the treatment of localized esophageal cancer.

Authors:  James Welsh; Arya Amini; Anna Likhacheva; Jeremy Erasmus J; Daniel Gomez; Marta Davila; Reza J Mehran; Ritsuko Komaki; Zhongxing Liao; Wayne L Hofstetter; Jeffrey Lee H; Manoop S Bhutani; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 4.  Minimally invasive staging of esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Kunal Mehta; Valentino Bianco; Omar Awais; James D Luketich; Arjun Pennathur
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-03

5.  Patterns and time of recurrence after complete resection of esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Masahiko Sugiyama; Masaru Morita; Rintaro Yoshida; Koji Ando; Akinori Egashira; Ohga Takefumi; Hiroshi Saeki; Eiji Oki; Yoshihiro Kakeji; Yoshihisa Sakaguchi; Yoshihiko Maehara
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-02-28       Impact factor: 2.549

6.  Positron emission tomography for initial staging of esophageal cancer among medicare beneficiaries.

Authors:  Vlad V Simianu; Thomas K Varghese; Meghan R Flanagan; David R Flum; Veena Shankaran; Brant K Oelschlager; Michael S Mulligan; Douglas E Wood; Carlos A Pellegrini; Farhood Farjah
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2016-06

7.  Impact of pretreatment imaging on survival of esophagectomy after induction therapy for esophageal cancer: who should be given the benefit of the doubt?: esophagectomy outcomes of patients with suspicious metastatic lesions.

Authors:  Loretta Erhunmwunsee; Brian R Englum; Mark W Onaitis; Thomas A D'Amico; Mark F Berry
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-09-19       Impact factor: 5.344

8.  Endoscopic ultrasonography in esophageal cancer leads to improved survival rates: results from a population-based study.

Authors:  Sachin Wani; Ananya Das; Amit Rastogi; Jennifer Drahos; Winifred Ricker; Ruth Parsons; Ajay Bansal; Roy Yen; Lindsay Hosford; Meghan Jankowski; Prateek Sharma; Michael B Cook
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 9.  State-of-the-art molecular imaging in esophageal cancer management: implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.

Authors:  Jolinta Lin; Seth Kligerman; Rakhi Goel; Payam Sajedi; Mohan Suntharalingam; Michael D Chuong
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-02

Review 10.  The role of FDG-PET and staging laparoscopy in the management of patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction.

Authors:  Harry H Yoon; Val J Lowe; Stephen D Cassivi; Yvonne Romero
Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin North Am       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.806

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.