| Literature DB >> 23417499 |
Sona Balogova1, Jean-Noël Talbot, Valérie Nataf, Laure Michaud, Virginie Huchet, Khaldoun Kerrou, Françoise Montravers.
Abstract
6-Fluoro-((18)F)-L-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (FDOPA) is an amino acid analogue for positron emission tomography (PET) imaging which has been registered since 2006 in several European Union (EU) countries and by several pharmaceutical firms. Neuroendocrine tumour (NET) imaging is part of its registered indications. NET functional imaging is a very competitive niche, competitors of FDOPA being two well-established radiopharmaceuticals for scintigraphy, (123)I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) and (111)In-pentetreotide, and even more radiopharmaceuticals for PET, including fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) and somatostatin analogues. Nevertheless, there is no universal single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) or PET tracer for NET imaging, at least for the moment. FDOPA, as the other PET tracers, is superior in diagnostic performance in a limited number of precise NET types which are currently medullary thyroid cancer, catecholamine-producing tumours with a low aggressiveness and well-differentiated carcinoid tumours of the midgut, and in cases of congenital hyperinsulinism. This article reports on diagnostic performance and impact on management of FDOPA according to the NET type, emphasising the results of comparative studies with other radiopharmaceuticals. By pooling the results of the published studies with a defined standard of truth, patient-based sensitivity to detect recurrent medullary thyroid cancer was 70 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 62.1-77.6] for FDOPA vs 44 % (95 % CI 35-53.4) for FDG; patient-based sensitivity to detect phaeochromocytoma/paraganglioma was 94 % (95 % CI 91.4-97.1) for FDOPA vs 69 % (95 % CI 60.2-77.1) for (123)I-MIBG; and patient-based sensitivity to detect midgut NET was 89 % (95 % CI 80.3-95.3) for FDOPA vs 80 % (95 % CI 69.2-88.4) for somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with a larger gap in lesion-based sensitivity (97 vs 49 %). Previously unpublished FDOPA results from our team are reported in some rare NET, such as small cell prostate cancer, or in emerging indications, such as metastatic NET of unknown primary (CUP-NET) or adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) ectopic production. An evidence-based strategy in NET functional imaging is as yet affected by a low number of comparative studies. Then the suggested diagnostic trees, being a consequence of the analysis of present data, could be modified, for some indications, by a wider experience mainly involving face-to-face studies comparing FDOPA and (68)Ga-labelled peptides.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23417499 PMCID: PMC3644207 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-013-2342-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging ISSN: 1619-7070 Impact factor: 9.236
FDOPA and comparators in MTC: comparative studies with a standard of truth
| Reference | No. of patients | FDOPA imaging technique | Performances of FDOPA imaging | Performances of comparator |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hoegerle et al. (2001) [ | 11 patients with elevated calcitonin levels | PET | Se lesion based | |
| Overall | ||||
| 27 lesions | 17/27=63 % | FDG 12/27=44 % | ||
| SRS 14/27=52 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 22/27=81 % | ||||
| Primary tumour/local recurrence | ||||
| 2/3=66 % | FDG 2/3=66 % | |||
| SRS 2/3=66 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 3/3=100 % | ||||
| Lymph node metastases | ||||
| 14/16=88 % | FDG 7/16=44 % | |||
| SRS 8/16=50 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 11/16=69 % | ||||
| Organ metastases | ||||
| 1/8=13 % | FDG 3/8=38 % | |||
| SRS 4/8=50 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 8/8=100 % | ||||
| Sp lesion based | ||||
| Overall | ||||
| 21/22=95 % | FDG 22/22=100 % | |||
| SRS 22/22=100 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 18/27=67 % | ||||
| Primary tumour/local recurrence | ||||
| 8/8=100 % | FDG 8/8=100 % | |||
| SRS 8/8=100 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 6/11=55 % | ||||
| Lymph node metastases | ||||
| 5/5=100 % | FDG 5/5=100 % | |||
| SRS 5/5=100 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 4/7=57 % | ||||
| Organ metastases | ||||
| 8/9=89 % | FDG 9/9=100 % | |||
| SRS 9/9=100 % | ||||
| CT or MRI 8/9=89 % | ||||
| Beuthien-Baumann et al. (2007) [ | 15 patients with recurrent or metastatic MTC | PET | Patient-based detection rate | |
| FDG 15 patients | 8/15=53 % | FDG 7/15=47 % | ||
| OMFD 10 patients | OMFD 1/10=10 % | |||
| Koopmans et al. (2008) [ | 21 patients with biochemical recurrence of MTC, 134 lesions | PET | Se patient based | |
| 13/21=62 % | FDG 4/17=24 % | |||
| FDG 17 patients/102 lesions | DMSA-V 5/18=28 % | |||
| MRI or CT 7/18=39 % | ||||
| DMSA-V 18 patients/108 lesions | ||||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| MRI or CT 18 patients/126 lesions | 95/134=71 % | FDG 48/102=30 % | ||
| DMSA-V 20/108=19 % | ||||
| MRI or CT 80/126=64 % | ||||
| For all imaging modalities Se 2/8=25 % if serum calcitonin baseline levels <500 ng/l | ||||
| Beheshti et al. (2009) [ | 26 patients with MTC and elevated calcitonin levels | PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| 53 lesions | 21/26=81 % | FDG 15/26=58 % | ||
| Detection rate for malignant lesions | ||||
| 50/53=94 % | FDG 33/53=62 % | |||
| CT 34/53=64 % | ||||
| Luster et al. (2010) [ | Follow-up of MTC | PET and PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| 28 examinations, 26 patients | PET/CT 14/19=74 % | CT 13/19=68 % | ||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| PET/CT 9/9=100 % | CT 7/9=78 % | |||
| In relation to serum calcitonin baseline levels | ||||
| < 60 ng/l → 0 TP results | ||||
| >120 ng/l → 0 TN results | ||||
| >150 ng/l → Se & Sp=100 % | ||||
| Marzola et al. (2010) [ | 18 patients with occult recurrence of MTC | PET/CT | Patient-based detection rate | |
| 15/18=83 % | FDG 11/18=61 % | |||
| CT 9/18=50 % | ||||
| Kauhanen et al. (2011) [ | 19 patients with occult recurrence of MTC, 118 regions | PET/CT | Patient-based detection rate | |
| 11/19=58 % | FDG 10/19=53 % | |||
| MDCT 9/19=47 % | ||||
| MRI 10/17=59 % | ||||
| Region-based detection rate | ||||
| 61/118=52 % | FDG 55/118=47 % | |||
| MDCT 54/118=46 % | ||||
| MRI 92/118=78 % | ||||
| Treglia et al. (2012) [ | 18 patients with occult recurrence of MTC, 72 lesions | PET/CT | Patient-based sensitivity | |
| 13/18=72 % | SRPET 6/18=33 % | |||
| FDG 3/18=17 % | ||||
| Lesion-based sensitivity | ||||
| 61/72=85 % | SRPET 14/72=20 % | |||
| FDG 20/72=28 % | ||||
| Overall | 156 patients | Se patient based | ||
| 95/136=70 % (95 % CI 62.1–77.6) | FDG 50/113=44 % (95 % CI 35–53.4) | |||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| 284/404=70 % (95 % CI 65.8–74.8) | FDG 156/372=42 % (95 % CI 36.9–46.9) | |||
CI confidence interval, DMSA-V pentavalent dimercaptosuccinic acid scintigraphy and SPECT, MTC medullary thyroid cancer, OMFD 3-O-methyl-6-[18F]fluoro-DOPA, MD multidetector, Se sensitivity,Sp specificity, SRS somatostatin receptor scintigraphy using 111In-pentetreotide
Fig. 1MTC treated by total thyroidectomy and lymph node dissection. a–b The patient presented with an occult biochemical recurrence 1.5 years later [serum calcitonin (CTN)=1,130 ng/l, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) =46 μg/l] and was referred to FDOPA PET/CT. On the early images after injection (a), a clear focus was visible, corresponding on CT to a left lymph node in the left upper mediastinum, with smaller and less intense contralateral foci. But the foci were no longer visible 1 h later on the whole-body acquisition (b) and the examination was considered as doubtful. c–e Another 1.5 years later, the markers were still rising (CTN=2,400 ng/ml, CEA =59 μg/l) and the patient was referred for FDG and FDOPA PET/CT prior to surgical exploration. On FDG PET/CT, 1 h after injection, a faint uptake (SUVmax =1.8) was visible by the left mediastinal lymph node (the most intense FDOPA uptake 1.5 years before) (c) but no other lesion (d). On FDOPA PET/CT (e), the left mediastinal focus took up FDOPA (SUVmax =2.9) together with several other foci: one left supraclavicular focus and one upper thoracic focus on the left side and two foci in the right upper mediastinum. Their intensity decreased after 1 h. The dissection and histological examination of the left supraclavicular region found two metastatic lymph nodes, 8 and 5 mm in size. CTN levels dropped to 1,600 ng/l. f Nineteen months later, another FDOPA PET was performed for restaging prior to surgery. With the exception of the left supraclavicular focus which had been resected, all other foci were viable, and their uptake at 1 h was now as intense as on the early images. This observation illustrates the importance of early image acquisition after FDOPA injection for early detection of metastatic MTC and the better performance of FDOPA as compared to FDG in a slow-growing form of MTC
FDOPA and comparators in phaeochromocytoma and/or paraganglioma: studies with a standard of truth
| Reference | No. of patients | FDOPA imaging technique | Performance of FDOPA imaging | Comparator(s) and performance(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hoegerle et al. (2002) [ | 14 patients with suspected phaeo, 8 controls | PET | Se patient based | |
| 14/14=100 % | 123I-MIBG Se 9/12=75 % | |||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| 8/8=100 % | ||||
| Se lesion/site based | ||||
| 17/17=100 % | 123I-MIBG 10/14=71 % | |||
| Sp lesion/site based | ||||
| 25/25=100 % | 123I-MIBG 22/22=100 % | |||
| Montravers et al. (2008) [ | 24 patients with suspected or recurrent phaeo | PET or PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| 10/11=91 % | ||||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| 14/14=100 % | ||||
| Taïeb et al. (2008) [ | 9 patients: 5 with phaeo, 4 with PG | PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| 9/9=100 % | FDG PET/CT 8/9=89 % | |||
| SRS 4/5=80 % | ||||
| 131I-MIBG 6/8=75 % | ||||
| Fiebrich et al. (2009) [ | 48 patients with catecholamine excess | PET | Se patient based | |
| 43/48=90 % | 123I-MIBG 31/48=65 % | |||
| CT/MRI 32/48=67 % | ||||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| 91/124=73 % | 123I-MIBG 60/124=48 % | |||
| CT/MRI 55/124=44 % | ||||
| Imani et al. (2009) [ | 25 patients with suspected or known phaeo | PET (11 patients) | Se patient based | |
| PET/CT (14 patients) | 11/13=85 % | |||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| 13/13=100 % | ||||
| Kauhanen et al. (2009) [ | 25 patients: 16 for detection and staging phaeo, 9 for restaging phaeo | PET/CT | Staging | |
| Se patient based | ||||
| 5/5=100 % | ||||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| 11/11=100 % | ||||
| Restaging | ||||
| Se patient based | ||||
| 5/5=100 % | ||||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| 3/4=75 % | ||||
| Timmers et al. (2009) [ | 53 patients with known or suspected PG, including: | PET | Se lesion based | |
| 15 with SDHB mutation | Non-metastatic PG | |||
| 13 without SDHB mutation | 21/26=81 % | 123I-MIBG 20/26=78 % | ||
| FDA PET/CT 20/26=78 % | ||||
| FDG PET/CT 23/26=88 % | ||||
| Metastatic PG | ||||
| 96/211=45 % | 123I-MIBG 106/187=57 % | |||
| FDA PET/CT 161/211=76 % | ||||
| FDG PET/CT 157/211=74 % | ||||
| SDHB mutation | ||||
| 25/126=20 % | 123I-MIBG 60/106=57 % | |||
| FDA PET/CT 103/126=82 % | ||||
| FDG PET/CT 105/126=83 % | ||||
| Without SDHB mutation | ||||
| Se 79/85=93 % | 123I-MIBG 48/81=59 % | |||
| FDA PET/CT 65/85=76 % | ||||
| FDG PET/CT 53/85=62 % | ||||
| Fottner et al. (2010) [ | 30 patients: | PET | Se patient based | |
| 24 with catecholamine excess | 24/25=96 % | 123I-MIBG 20/25=80 % | ||
| 5 with adrenal incidentaloma | SDHB mutation 2/6=33 % | 123I-MIBG SDHB mutation 2/6=33 % | ||
| 1 with SDHD mutation | SDHD mutation 5/6=83 % | 123I-MIBG SDHD mutation 3/6=50 % | ||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| Se 63/64=98 % | 123I-MIBG 34/64=53 % | |||
| CT/MRI Se 35/64=55 % | ||||
| Sp lesion based | ||||
| 63/63=100 % | Sp 31/34=91 % | |||
| Luster et al. (2010) [ | 25 patients with suspected phaeo | PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| Staging 8/8=100 % | ||||
| Restaging Se 7/7=100 % | ||||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| Stading 2/2=100 % | ||||
| Restaging Sp 7/8=88 % | ||||
| Charrier et al. (2011) [ | 25 patients with known or suspected non-metastatic extra-adrenal PG | PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| 22/23=96 % | SRS 17/23=74 % | |||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| 39/45=87 % | SRS 23/45=51 % p<0.001 | |||
| Se H&N or thoracic lesions | ||||
| 29/30=97 % | SRS 20/30=67 % | |||
| Se abdominal lesions | ||||
| 10/15=67 % | SRS 3/15=20 % | |||
| King et al. (2011) [ | 10 patients with H&N PG: | PET/C | Se patient based | |
| 7 SDHD mutation | 10/10=100 % | CT/MRI 10/10=100 % | ||
| 3 SDHB mutation | FDG PET/CT 8/10=80 % | |||
| FDA PET/CT 4/10=40 % | ||||
| 123I-MIBG 4/10=40 % | ||||
| SRS 8/9=89 % | ||||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| 26/26=100 % | CT/MRI 21/26=81 % | |||
| FDG PET/CT 20/26=77 % | ||||
| FDA PET/CT 12/26=46 % | ||||
| 123I-MIBG 8/26=31 % | ||||
| SRS 16/25=64 % | ||||
| Rufini et al. (2011) [ | 12 patients with known or suspected recurrent PG | PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| Se 12/12=100 % | 123I-MIBG Se 9/12=75 % | |||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| Overall | ||||
| 347/353=98 % | 123I-MIBG 136/353=38 % | |||
| Bone | ||||
| 285/287 | 123I-MIBG 97/287 | |||
| Soft tissue | ||||
| 62/66=94 % | 123I-MIBG 39/66=59 % | |||
| Lymph nodes | ||||
| 25/29=86 % | 123I-MIBG 18/29=62 % | |||
| Liver | ||||
| 25/25=100 % | 123I-MIBG 18/25=72 % | |||
| Rischke et al. (2012) [ | 101 patients with suspected or proven phaeo or PG: 68 proven | PET/CT | Se patient based | |
| Overall | ||||
| 63/68=92 % | ||||
| VHL mutation 17/19=89 % | ||||
| SDHB mutation 10/12=83 % | ||||
| SDHD mutation 8/8=100 % | ||||
| Other mutation 3/3=100 % | ||||
| No mutation 20/20=100 % | ||||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| 29/33=88 % | ||||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| Overall | ||||
| 180/189=95 % | ||||
| Overall | 258 patients with phaeo or PG | Se patient based | ||
| 89 patients without | 243/258=94 % (95 % CI 91.4–97.1) | 123I-MIBG 79/115=69 % (95 % CI 60.2–77.1) | ||
| Sp patient based | ||||
| 84/89=94 % (95 % CI 87.4–98.2) | ||||
| Se lesion based | ||||
| 700/866=81 % (95 % CI 78.4–83.4) | 123I-MIBG 314/670=47 % (95 % CI 43.1–50.7) | |||
| Sp lesion based | ||||
| Sp 88/88=100 % (95 % CI 95.9–100) | 123I-MIBG 53/56=95 % (95 % CI 85.1–98.9) | |||
CI confidence interval, FDA 18F-fluorodopamine, H&N head and neck, phaeo phaeochromocytoma, PG paraganglioma, SDHB succinate dehydrogenase subunit B, SDHD succinate dehydrogenase subunit D, Se sensitivity (or patient-based detection rate when all patients are diseased). Sp specificity, SRS somatostatin receptor scintigraphy using 111In-pentetreotide, VHL von Hippel-Lindau
Fig. 2Right block of images FDOPA PET/CT: anterior and left lateral maximum intensity projection, transverse slice. Left block corresponding FDG PET/CT images. FDOPA PET/CT was performed for characterising a left adrenal tumour (dashed arrow) discovered incidentally on FDG PET/CT performed for staging a squamous cell carcinoma of the anal canal (full arrow) in an asymptomatic patient. As the adrenal tumour took up both FDOPA and FDG, it was interpreted as an aggressive phaeochromocytoma. This was confirmed on histological examination. This observation illustrates the increase in specificity brought by FDOPA for characterising NET
Fig. 3a–b In a haemodialysed patient candidate for renal grafting, systematic CT discovered a tumour of the terminal ileum evocative of a carcinoid origin with mesenteric locoregional adenopathies, the largest being 35 mm in size. Biopsy of a right iliac adenopathy confirmed a metastatic well-differentiated NET (Ki-67<1 %). FDOPA PET/CT performed for staging showed the primary carcinoid tumour in the terminal ileum (a dotted arrow) and large lymphadenopathy with two satellite lymph nodes (a black arrows), but also a focus in the upper left abdomen, SUVmax =4.7 (a, b green arrow) corresponding on CT to a dense content in a renal cyst. c FDG PET/CT was performed to better characterise the renal anomaly that took up FDG (c green arrow on the transverse slice) with a somewhat lower intensity than FDOPA (SUVmax = 3.9). As expected, the metastatic carcinoid tumour in the right abdomen did not take up FDG (c). Thus the renal cystic lesion was probably not of a carcinoid origin. A CT-guided biopsy of the renal lesion was performed and histology revealed a renal carcinoma. This observation illustrates the ability of FDOPA to detect carcinoid tumours with low aggressiveness, but also renal carcinomas, and the synergy between FDOPA and FDG PET/CT
FDOPA and comparators in digestive carcinoid tumours: studies with a standard of truth
| Reference | No. of patients | Performance of FDOPA imaging | Comparator(s) and performance(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hoegerle et al. (2001) [ | 16/17 patients with confirmed gastrointestinal carcinoid tumours | Se patient based | |
| 11/16=69 % | SRS 13/16=81 % | ||
| 92 sites | FDG 7/16=44 % | ||
| CT/MRI 12/16=75 % | |||
| Se site based | |||
| Primary tumour | |||
| FDOPA 7/8=88 % | SRS 4/8=50 % | ||
| FDG 2/8=25 % | |||
| CT/MRI 7/8=88 % | |||
| LN metastases | |||
| FDOPA 41/47=87 % | SRS 27/47=57 % | ||
| FDG 14/47=30 % | |||
| CT/MRI 47/47=100 % | |||
| Organ metastases | |||
| FDOPA 12/37=32 % | SRS 21/67=57 % | ||
| FDG 11/37=30 % | |||
| CT/MRI 37/37=100 % | |||
| Overall site based | |||
| 60/92=65 % | SRS 52/92=57 % | ||
| FDG 29/92=27 % | |||
| CT/MRI 91/92=99 % | |||
| FDOPA impact on patient management: 30 % | |||
| CT/MRI>FDOPA>SRS>FDG | |||
| Koopmans et al.(2008) [ | 24 patients with carcinoid tumour | Se patient based | |
| 371 lesions | FDOPA 23/24=96 % | 5-HTP 24/24=100 % | |
| SRS 18/24=86 % | |||
| CT 23/24=96 % | |||
| Se lesion based | |||
| PET 322/371=87 % | 5-HTP 288/371=78 % | ||
| PET+CT 364/371=98 % | 5-HTP+CT 330/371=89 % | ||
| SRS 182/371=49 % | |||
| SRS+CT 271/371=73 % | |||
| CT 234/371=63 % | |||
| FDOPA & 5-HTP detected more lesions than SRS ( | |||
| Montravers et al. (2006) [ | 18 examinations in 16 patients with midgut carcinoid tumour | Se patient based | |
| FDOPA 13/14=93 % | SRS 11/14=78 % | ||
| Sp patient based | |||
| FDOPA 3/4=75 % | SRS 2/3=67 % | ||
| Yakemchuk et al. (2012) [ | 18 patients with midgut carcinoid tumour | Se patient based | |
| 189 sites | 20/21=95 % | SRS 19/21=90 % | |
| 183 lesions | CT 19/21 | ||
| Se site based | |||
| 53/56=95 % | SRS 34/56=61 % | ||
| CT 37/56=66 % | |||
| FDOPA vs SRS and/or CT, | |||
| Se lesion based | |||
| 175/183=96 % | SRS 92/183=50 % | ||
| CT 126/183=69 % | |||
| FDOPA vs SRS and/or CT, | |||
| Sp site based | |||
| 132/132=100 % | SRS 132/133=99 % | ||
| CT 132/135=98 % | |||
| 2/21=10 % major impact on patient management | |||
| 10/21=48 % minor impact on patient management | |||
| Overall | 76 patients | Se patient based | |
| 68/76=89 % (95 % CI 80.3–95.3) | SRS 60/75=80 % (95 % CI 69.2–88.4) | ||
| CT/MRI 54/61=89 % (95 % C: 77.8–95.3) | |||
| Se site based | |||
| 113/148=76 % (95 % CI 76.3–83.2) | SRS 86/148=58 % (95 % CI 50.2–66.0) | ||
| CT/MRI 128/148=86 % (95 % CI 81–92) | |||
| Se lesion based | |||
| 539/554=97 % (95 % CI 96.0–98.6) | SRS 274/554=49 % (95 % CI 45.3–53.7) | ||
| CT/MRI 360/554=65 % (95 % C: 61–69) | |||
LN lymph node, 5-HTP 11C-5-hydroxytryptophan PET, CI confidence interval, Se sensitivity,Sp specificity, SRS somatostatin receptor scintigraphy using 111In-pentetreotide
Fig. 4FDOPA PET/CT: maximum intensity projection, transverse slice and coronal slice. Search for focal hyperplasia of pancreatic beta cells in an infant with hyperinsulinism. FDOPA PET/CT localised a focus in the tail of the pancreas which was resected. Histological examination confirmed clustered beta-cell hyperplasia and the infant became euglycaemic