M C Winter1, U Haberkorn, C Kratochwil. 1. Abteilung für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 400, 69120, Heidelberg, Deutschland, marc.winter@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Abstract
CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE: The diagnostic work-up in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) syndrome is extensive, highly time-consuming and cost-intensive and ultimately often fails to detect a primary site. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: In this context chest X-ray and computed tomography (CT) have been used as standard imaging modalities in CUP syndrome. METHODOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: Since the introduction of positron emission tomography (PET) evaluation of tumor vitality has become possible. Furthermore, PET-CT hybrid scanners allow the combination of functional and morphological imaging. PERFORMANCE: Several meta-analyses have reported an additional overall detection rate between 24.5 % and 44 % by either PET or PET-CT. Metastatic localization (cervical versus extracervical) did not influence the performance. The sensitivity was usually high (> 80 %) but specificity was moderate ranging from 68 % to 88 % at best. If mentioned, the results obtained by fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET significantly changed the clinical management in approximately one third of the patients studied. In a direct comparison with PET alone, PET-CT did not depict significantly more primary tumors but was able to reduce false positive findings. ACHIEVEMENTS: To determine the real additional value of PET-CT in the diagnosis of CUP syndrome large prospective studies with more uniform inclusion criteria are needed. Despite the capabilities of FDG-PET-CT there is as yet no evidence that a potentially improved diagnostic algorithm is translated into a better patient outcome. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Nevertheless, FDG-PET-CT should be performed in all CUP patients where conventional imaging failed to detect a primary site or the results are equivocal. In CUP patients with cervical lymph node metastases PET-CT should be carried out prior to panendoscopy to reduce the number of false negative biopsies.
CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE: The diagnostic work-up in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) syndrome is extensive, highly time-consuming and cost-intensive and ultimately often fails to detect a primary site. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL METHODS: In this context chest X-ray and computed tomography (CT) have been used as standard imaging modalities in CUP syndrome. METHODOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: Since the introduction of positron emission tomography (PET) evaluation of tumor vitality has become possible. Furthermore, PET-CT hybrid scanners allow the combination of functional and morphological imaging. PERFORMANCE: Several meta-analyses have reported an additional overall detection rate between 24.5 % and 44 % by either PET or PET-CT. Metastatic localization (cervical versus extracervical) did not influence the performance. The sensitivity was usually high (> 80 %) but specificity was moderate ranging from 68 % to 88 % at best. If mentioned, the results obtained by fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-PET significantly changed the clinical management in approximately one third of the patients studied. In a direct comparison with PET alone, PET-CT did not depict significantly more primary tumors but was able to reduce false positive findings. ACHIEVEMENTS: To determine the real additional value of PET-CT in the diagnosis of CUP syndrome large prospective studies with more uniform inclusion criteria are needed. Despite the capabilities of FDG-PET-CT there is as yet no evidence that a potentially improved diagnostic algorithm is translated into a better patient outcome. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Nevertheless, FDG-PET-CT should be performed in all CUP patients where conventional imaging failed to detect a primary site or the results are equivocal. In CUP patients with cervical lymph node metastases PET-CT should be carried out prior to panendoscopy to reduce the number of false negative biopsies.
Authors: Lutz S Freudenberg; Markus Fischer; Gerald Antoch; Walter Jentzen; Andreas Gutzeit; Sandra J Rosenbaum; Andreas Bockisch; Thomas Egelhof Journal: Med Princ Pract Date: 2005 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.927
Authors: Anne Kirstine H Møller; Annika Loft; Anne K Berthelsen; Karen D Pedersen; Jesper Graff; Charlotte B Christensen; Junia C Costa; Lene T Skovgaard; Katharina Perell; Bodil L Petersen; Gedske Daugaard Journal: Oncologist Date: 2012-06-18
Authors: Jong Sun Park; Jae-Joon Yim; Won Jun Kang; June-Key Chung; Chul-Gyu Yoo; Young Whan Kim; Sung Koo Han; Young-Soo Shim; Sang-Min Lee Journal: BMC Res Notes Date: 2011-03-09