Literature DB >> 21802118

A pilot study utilizing whole body 18 F-FDG-PET/CT as a comprehensive screening strategy for occult malignancy in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism.

Matthew T Rondina1, Nathan Wanner, Robert C Pendleton, Larry W Kraiss, Russell Vinik, Guy A Zimmerman, Marta Heilbrun, John M Hoffman, Kathryn A Morton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Approximately 7-10% of patients with unprovoked VTE will be diagnosed with cancer within 12 months. Although cancer screening has been proposed in these patients, the optimal strategy remains unclear. In a pilot study, we prospectively investigated the use of FDG-PET/CT to screen for occult malignancy in 40 patients with unprovoked VTE. MATERIALS/
METHODS: Patients were initially screened for occult malignancy with a focused history, physical, and laboratory evaluation. Patients underwent whole body FDG-PET/CT and were followed for up to two years for a new diagnosis of cancer. The total costs of using FDG-PET/CT as a comprehensive screening strategy were determined using 2010 Medicare reimbursement rates.
RESULTS: Completion of FDG-PET/CT imaging was feasible and identified abnormal findings requiring additional evaluations in 62.5% of patients. Occult malignancy was evident in only one patient (cancer incidence 2.5%) and FDG-PET/CT imaging excluded malignancy in the remainder of patients. No patients with a negative FDG-PET/CT were diagnosed with malignancy during an average (±SD) follow-up of 449 (±311) days. The use of FDG-PET/CT to screen for occult malignancy added $59,151 in total costs ($1,479 per patient). The majority of these costs were due to the cost of the FDG-PET/CT ($1,162 per patient or 78.5% of total per-patient costs).
CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET/CT may have utility for excluding occult malignancy in patients with unprovoked VTE. The costs of this comprehensive screening strategy were comparable to other screening approaches. Larger studies are needed to further evaluate the utility and cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET/CT as a cancer screening strategy in patients with unprovoked VTE.
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21802118      PMCID: PMC3277867          DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2011.06.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thromb Res        ISSN: 0049-3848            Impact factor:   3.944


  26 in total

Review 1.  Risks and safety aspects related to PET/MR examinations.

Authors:  Gunnar Brix; Elke A Nekolla; Dietmar Nosske; Jürgen Griebel
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 2.  The treatment of venous thromboembolism in special populations.

Authors:  Matthew T Rondina; Robert C Pendleton; Michelle Wheeler; George M Rodgers
Journal:  Thromb Res       Date:  2006-07-31       Impact factor: 3.944

Review 3.  Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes and the role of PET imaging.

Authors:  Chrissa Sioka; Andreas Fotopoulos; Athanassios P Kyritsis
Journal:  Oncology       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 2.935

4.  Prognosis of cancers associated with venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  H T Sørensen; L Mellemkjaer; J H Olsen; J A Baron
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-12-21       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee.

Authors:  Lincoln L Berland; Stuart G Silverman; Richard M Gore; William W Mayo-Smith; Alec J Megibow; Judy Yee; James A Brink; Mark E Baker; Michael P Federle; W Dennis Foley; Isaac R Francis; Brian R Herts; Gary M Israel; Glenn Krinsky; Joel F Platt; William P Shuman; Andrew J Taylor
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 5.532

6.  Is extensive screening for cancer in idiopathic venous thromboembolism warranted?

Authors:  F F Van Doormaal; W Terpstra; R Van Der Griend; M H Prins; M R Nijziel; M A Van De Ree; H R Büller; J C Dutilh; A ten Cate-Hoek; S M Van Den Heiligenberg; J Van Der Meer; J M Otten
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 5.824

Review 7.  Role and cost effectiveness of PET/CT in management of patients with cancer.

Authors:  Muhammad Wasif Saif; Ifigenia Tzannou; Nektaria Makrilia; Kostas Syrigos
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2010-06

Review 8.  Systematic review: the Trousseau syndrome revisited: should we screen extensively for cancer in patients with venous thromboembolism?

Authors:  Marc Carrier; Grégoire Le Gal; Philip S Wells; Dean Fergusson; Tim Ramsay; Marc A Rodger
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-09-02       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 9.  Venous thromboembolism and cancer: risks and outcomes.

Authors:  Agnes Y Y Lee; Mark N Levine
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2003-06-17       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  Hyperhomocysteinemia and venous thromboembolism: a risk factor more prevalent in the elderly and in idiopathic cases.

Authors:  Philippe Hainaut; Carine Jaumotte; David Verhelst; Pierre Wallemacq; Jean-Luc Gala; Edith Lavenne; Michel Heusterspreute; Francis Zech; Maurice Moriau
Journal:  Thromb Res       Date:  2002-04-15       Impact factor: 3.944

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  Thrombosis and cancer.

Authors:  Annie Young; Oliver Chapman; Carole Connor; Christopher Poole; Peter Rose; Ajay K Kakkar
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  Cost-effectiveness of Fluorine-18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in tumours other than lung cancer: A systematic review.

Authors:  Salvatore Annunziata; Carmelo Caldarella; Giorgio Treglia
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2014-03-28

Review 3.  The role of molecular imaging in diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Sina Houshmand; Ali Salavati; Søren Hess; Mudalsha Ravina; Abass Alavi
Journal:  Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-08-15

Review 4.  Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: an underestimated major health problem.

Authors:  Jihane Khalil; Badr Bensaid; Hanan Elkacemi; Mohamed Afif; Younes Bensaid; Tayeb Kebdani; Noureddine Benjaafar
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-06-20       Impact factor: 2.754

5.  Positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography as a screening tool for occult malignancy in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism: an observational study.

Authors:  Maria Chauchard; Khadija Benali; Thomas Papo; Karim Sacre
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  Screening for cancer in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nick van Es; Grégoire Le Gal; Hans-Martin Otten; Philippe Robin; Andrea Piccioli; Ramon Lécumberri; Luis Jara-Palomares; Piotr Religa; Viriginie Rieu; Matthew T Rondina; Mariëlle M Beckers; Paolo Prandoni; Pierre-Yves Salaun; Marcello Di Nisio; Patrick M Bossuyt; Harry R Büller; Marc Carrier
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-06-10       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Performance of 18F-fluorodesoxyglucose positron-emission tomography combined with low-dose computed tomography for cancer screening in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Philippe Robin; Pierre-Yves Le Roux; Karine Lacut; Benjamin Planquette; Nathalie Prévot-Bitot; Christian Lavigne; Jean Pastre; Adel Merah; Grégoire Le Gal; Pierre-Yves Salaun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.