BACKGROUND: Anal cancer is a rare tumour accounting for ∼2% of all colorectal cancers between 1997 and 2000 in the UK. Staging is still dominated by DRE (digital rectal examination), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging. The role of PET as a definitive modality is still emerging and there are relatively few adequate studies in the literature. METHODS: We looked at patients treated radically for anal cancer at Mount Vernon Cancer Centre (UK) between 2009 and 2010. Eighty-eight patients underwent treatment according to data-based coding records of which 46 had positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scans. Notes were unavailable for three patients. We compared staging following conventional modalities (DRE, MRI and CT) and PET/CT scans for these 43 patients. RESULTS: In 18 patients, the PET/CT stage differed from MRI. PET/CT altered the stage in 42% of patients but changes in subsequent management were not implemented. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that PET/CT does alter staging in a significant number of cases although it did not lead to change in management under the current guidelines. Furthermore, there is agreement that PET/CT shows greater sensitivity for detection of lymph nodes and our study has demonstrated a distinct trend towards upstaging of anal cancer with PET/CT.
BACKGROUND:Anal cancer is a rare tumour accounting for ∼2% of all colorectal cancers between 1997 and 2000 in the UK. Staging is still dominated by DRE (digital rectal examination), computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging. The role of PET as a definitive modality is still emerging and there are relatively few adequate studies in the literature. METHODS: We looked at patients treated radically for anal cancer at Mount Vernon Cancer Centre (UK) between 2009 and 2010. Eighty-eight patients underwent treatment according to data-based coding records of which 46 had positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scans. Notes were unavailable for three patients. We compared staging following conventional modalities (DRE, MRI and CT) and PET/CT scans for these 43 patients. RESULTS: In 18 patients, the PET/CT stage differed from MRI. PET/CT altered the stage in 42% of patients but changes in subsequent management were not implemented. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that PET/CT does alter staging in a significant number of cases although it did not lead to change in management under the current guidelines. Furthermore, there is agreement that PET/CT shows greater sensitivity for detection of lymph nodes and our study has demonstrated a distinct trend towards upstaging of anal cancer with PET/CT.
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
Authors: Robert Siegel; Ricardo Niklas Werner; Stephan Koswig; Matthew Gaskins; Claus Rödel; Felix Aigner Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2021-04-02 Impact factor: 8.251
Authors: Beatrice Pessia; Lucia Romano; Antonio Giuliani; Gianni Lazzarin; Francesco Carlei; Mario Schietroma Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2020-05-12
Authors: Clelia Di Carlo; Maika di Benedetto; Lisa Vicenzi; Sara Costantini; Francesca Cucciarelli; Francesco Fenu; Eleonora Arena; Cristina Mariucci; Maria Montisci; Valeria Panni; Fabiola Patani; Marco Valenti; Andrea Palucci; Luca Burroni; Giovanna Mantello Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 6.244