OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical accuracy and clinical impact of positron emission tomography (PET) or positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in detecting and treating tumor recurrence in patients with treated uterine sarcoma. METHODS: Results of 36 patients who underwent PET or PET/CT in post-therapy surveillance of uterine sarcoma were retrospectively assessed. Histopathologic confirmation or clinical/radiological outcome at least 6 months after PET or PET/CT was standard of reference. RESULTS: The 36 patients underwent 48 PET or PET/CT scans as part of post-therapy surveillance. Thirty scans (8 PET and 22 PET/CT) were performed due to suspicion of disease recurrence on CT, whereas 18 scans (4 PET and 14 PET/CT) were performed as part of routine post-therapy surveillance in asymptomatic patients. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of PET or PET/CT were 92.9%, 100%, 94.4%, 100% and 80%, respectively, in patients with suspected recurrence and 87.5%, 95.5%, 93.3%, 87.5% and 95.5%, respectively, in asymptomatic patients. PET or PET/CT influenced the management of 12 patients (33.3%), by initiation of previously unplanned treatment in 8 patients and by avoidance of previously planned treatment in 4 patients. CONCLUSION: PET or PET/CT was highly effective in discriminating true recurrence in patients with suspected recurrence and was highly sensitive in detecting recurrence in asymptomatic patients. It had impacts on clinical decision making in a high proportion of patients.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical accuracy and clinical impact of positron emission tomography (PET) or positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in detecting and treating tumor recurrence in patients with treated uterine sarcoma. METHODS: Results of 36 patients who underwent PET or PET/CT in post-therapy surveillance of uterine sarcoma were retrospectively assessed. Histopathologic confirmation or clinical/radiological outcome at least 6 months after PET or PET/CT was standard of reference. RESULTS: The 36 patients underwent 48 PET or PET/CT scans as part of post-therapy surveillance. Thirty scans (8 PET and 22 PET/CT) were performed due to suspicion of disease recurrence on CT, whereas 18 scans (4 PET and 14 PET/CT) were performed as part of routine post-therapy surveillance in asymptomatic patients. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of PET or PET/CT were 92.9%, 100%, 94.4%, 100% and 80%, respectively, in patients with suspected recurrence and 87.5%, 95.5%, 93.3%, 87.5% and 95.5%, respectively, in asymptomatic patients. PET or PET/CT influenced the management of 12 patients (33.3%), by initiation of previously unplanned treatment in 8 patients and by avoidance of previously planned treatment in 4 patients. CONCLUSION: PET or PET/CT was highly effective in discriminating true recurrence in patients with suspected recurrence and was highly sensitive in detecting recurrence in asymptomatic patients. It had impacts on clinical decision making in a high proportion of patients.
Authors: Bernd Klaeser; Jakub Wiskirchen; Jan Wartenberg; Thilo Weitzel; Ralph A Schmid; Michel D Mueller; Thomas Krause Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-08-03 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Neha Sood; Abhisek Swaika; Bashar Hanooshi; James Waldorf; Jennifer Peterson; Kevin Wu; Steven Attia; Tri A Dinh Journal: Rare Tumors Date: 2015-05-19
Authors: A C M van de Luijtgaarden; J W J de Rooy; L F de Geus-Oei; W T A van der Graaf; W J G Oyen Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2008-10-04 Impact factor: 3.909