BACKGROUND: To investigate possible causes for false-negative findings on PET scans for solid-type lung cancers, we retrospectively compared PET findings to clinical and pathological features using multivariate analysis. METHODS: We reviewed PET/CT records, clinical records, preoperative thin-section CT images, and postoperative pathological records and selected only solid-type primary lung cancers with lesions ≤ 40 mm in diameter that had been definitively diagnosed by surgical resection. PET images with SUVmax of ≥ 2.5 were considered PET-positive. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of PET-positive or negative among five factors: body weight, blood glucose level, lesion size, location, and histological classification. RESULTS: A total of 187 solid-type primary lung cancers were selected. Forty lesions (21.4%) were judged as PET-negative and 147 lesions (78.6%) were judged as PET-positive. Multivariate logistic analysis for the 187 lesions revealed that lesion size (p<0.001) and histological tumour type (p<0.001) were significant factors for determining whether PET findings were negative. CONCLUSIONS: Among solid-type lung cancers, lesion size and histopathological findings were significantly associated with FDG uptake. In particular, it warrants attention that lesions ≤ 2 cm and bronchioloalveolar carcinoma and well-differentiated adenocarcinoma have a tendency for negative PET findings.
BACKGROUND: To investigate possible causes for false-negative findings on PET scans for solid-type lung cancers, we retrospectively compared PET findings to clinical and pathological features using multivariate analysis. METHODS: We reviewed PET/CT records, clinical records, preoperative thin-section CT images, and postoperative pathological records and selected only solid-type primary lung cancers with lesions ≤ 40 mm in diameter that had been definitively diagnosed by surgical resection. PET images with SUVmax of ≥ 2.5 were considered PET-positive. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of PET-positive or negative among five factors: body weight, blood glucose level, lesion size, location, and histological classification. RESULTS: A total of 187 solid-type primary lung cancers were selected. Forty lesions (21.4%) were judged as PET-negative and 147 lesions (78.6%) were judged as PET-positive. Multivariate logistic analysis for the 187 lesions revealed that lesion size (p<0.001) and histological tumour type (p<0.001) were significant factors for determining whether PET findings were negative. CONCLUSIONS: Among solid-type lung cancers, lesion size and histopathological findings were significantly associated with FDG uptake. In particular, it warrants attention that lesions ≤ 2 cm and bronchioloalveolar carcinoma and well-differentiated adenocarcinoma have a tendency for negative PET findings.
Authors: Mahsa Eskian; Abass Alavi; MirHojjat Khorasanizadeh; Benjamin L Viglianti; Hans Jacobsson; Tara D Barwick; Alipasha Meysamie; Sun K Yi; Shingo Iwano; Bohdan Bybel; Federico Caobelli; Filippo Lococo; Joaquim Gea; Antonio Sancho-Muñoz; Jukka Schildt; Ebru Tatcı; Constantin Lapa; Georgia Keramida; Michael Peters; Raef R Boktor; Joemon John; Alexander G Pitman; Tomasz Mazurek; Nima Rezaei Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-10-22 Impact factor: 9.236