PURPOSE: To assess the utility of FDG-PET in anal cancer for staging and impact on radiotherapy planning (RTP), response and detection of recurrent disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifty histopathological anal cancer patients were reviewed between 1996 and 2006. The median age was 58 years (range 36-85) with 19 males:31females. Clinical assessment with CT was compared to PET. Impact on management, disease response, recurrence and metastases was evaluated. RESULTS: The non-PET staging was Stage I(8), Stage II(18), Stage III(22), and Stage IV(2)s. The primary was strongly FDG avid in 98% with non-excised tumors compared to CT (58%). PET upstaged 17% with unsuspected pelvic/inguinal nodal disease. Pre-treatment PET identified 11 additional by involved nodal groups in 48 patients causing RTP amendments in 19%. Post-treatment PETs at median 17 weeks (range 9-28) showed complete responses in 20 (80%) and 5 (20%) partial responses (PR). PRs were biopsy positive in 2 and negative in 3. Fifteen had follow-up scans of which all nine PETs detected recurrences were pathologically confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: Anal cancer is FDG-PET avid. PET upstages 17% and changes the RTP in 19%. PET can aid in anal cancer staging and identification of residual disease, recurrent/metastatic disease but warrants further prospective studies.
PURPOSE: To assess the utility of FDG-PET in anal cancer for staging and impact on radiotherapy planning (RTP), response and detection of recurrent disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Fifty histopathological anal cancerpatients were reviewed between 1996 and 2006. The median age was 58 years (range 36-85) with 19 males:31females. Clinical assessment with CT was compared to PET. Impact on management, disease response, recurrence and metastases was evaluated. RESULTS: The non-PET staging was Stage I(8), Stage II(18), Stage III(22), and Stage IV(2)s. The primary was strongly FDG avid in 98% with non-excised tumors compared to CT (58%). PET upstaged 17% with unsuspected pelvic/inguinal nodal disease. Pre-treatment PET identified 11 additional by involved nodal groups in 48 patients causing RTP amendments in 19%. Post-treatment PETs at median 17 weeks (range 9-28) showed complete responses in 20 (80%) and 5 (20%) partial responses (PR). PRs were biopsy positive in 2 and negative in 3. Fifteen had follow-up scans of which all nine PETs detected recurrences were pathologically confirmed. CONCLUSIONS:Anal cancer is FDG-PET avid. PET upstages 17% and changes the RTP in 19%. PET can aid in anal cancer staging and identification of residual disease, recurrent/metastatic disease but warrants further prospective studies.
Authors: Jaffer A Ajani; Kathryn A Winter; Leonard L Gunderson; John Pedersen; Al B Benson; Charles R Thomas; Robert J Mayer; Michael G Haddock; Tyvin A Rich; Christopher G Willett Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-09-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Christoph Oehler; Sawyna Provencher; David Donath; Jean-Paul Bahary; Urs M Lütolf; I Frank Ciernik Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2010-05-13 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Johannes S de Jong; Jannet C Beukema; Gooitzen M van Dam; Riemer Slart; Clara Lemstra; Theo Wiggers Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Shanna A Matalon; Harvey J Mamon; Charles S Fuchs; Leona A Doyle; Sree Harsha Tirumani; Nikhil H Ramaiya; Michael H Rosenthal Journal: Radiographics Date: 2015 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.333