Anne-Mette Lebech1, Anne Gaardsting1, Annika Loft2, Jesper Graff3, Elena Markova4, Anne Kiil Bertelsen2, Jan Lysgård Madsen3, Kim Francis Andersen2, Eric von Benzon2, Morten Helms1, Lars R Mathiesen1, Kim P David1, Gitte Kronborg1, Andreas Kjaer5. 1. Department of Infectious Diseases, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark. 2. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Clinical Physiology & Nuclear Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark; and. 4. Department of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark. 5. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark akjaer@sund.ku.dk.
Abstract
A fast-track pathway has been established in Denmark to investigate patients with serious nonspecific symptoms and signs of cancer (NSSC), who are not eligible to enter an organ-specific cancer program. The prevalence of cancer in this cohort is approximately 20%. The optimal screening strategy in patients with NSSC remains unknown. The aim of the study was to investigate whether 18F-FDG PET/CT was superior to CT as an initial imaging modality in patients with NSSC. In a randomized prospective trial, the imaging modalities were compared with regard to diagnostic performance. Methods: Two hundred patients were randomized 1:1 to whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT or CT of the thorax and abdomen as the imaging modality. A tentative diagnosis was established after first-line imaging. The final referral diagnosis was adjudicated by the physician, when sufficient data were available. Results:One hundred ninety-seven patients were available for analysis because 3 patients withdrew consent before scanning. Thirty-nine (20%) patients were diagnosed with cancer, 10 (5%) with an infection, 15 (8%) with an autoimmune disease, and 76 (39%) with other diseases. In the remaining 57 patients (28%), no specific disease was found. 18F-FDG PET/CT had a higher specificity (96% vs. 85%; P = 0.028) and a higher accuracy (94% vs. 82%; P = 0.017) than CT. However, there were no statistically significant differences in sensitivity (83% vs. 70%) or negative predictive values (96% vs. 92%). No difference in days to final referral diagnosis according to randomization group could be shown (7.2 vs. 7.6 d). However, for the subgroups in which the imaging modality showed a suggestion of malignancy, there was a significant delay to final diagnosis in the CT group compared with the 18F-FDG PET/CT group (11.6 vs. 5.7 d; P = 0.02). Conclusion: Compared with CT, we found a higher diagnostic specificity and accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting cancer in patients with NSSC. 18F-FDG PET/CT should therefore be considered as first-line imaging in this group of patients.
RCT Entities:
A fast-track pathway has been established in Denmark to investigate patients with serious nonspecific symptoms and signs of cancer (NSSC), who are not eligible to enter an organ-specific cancer program. The prevalence of cancer in this cohort is approximately 20%. The optimal screening strategy in patients with NSSC remains unknown. The aim of the study was to investigate whether 18F-FDG PET/CT was superior to CT as an initial imaging modality in patients with NSSC. In a randomized prospective trial, the imaging modalities were compared with regard to diagnostic performance. Methods: Two hundred patients were randomized 1:1 to whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT or CT of the thorax and abdomen as the imaging modality. A tentative diagnosis was established after first-line imaging. The final referral diagnosis was adjudicated by the physician, when sufficient data were available. Results: One hundred ninety-seven patients were available for analysis because 3 patients withdrew consent before scanning. Thirty-nine (20%) patients were diagnosed with cancer, 10 (5%) with an infection, 15 (8%) with an autoimmune disease, and 76 (39%) with other diseases. In the remaining 57 patients (28%), no specific disease was found. 18F-FDG PET/CT had a higher specificity (96% vs. 85%; P = 0.028) and a higher accuracy (94% vs. 82%; P = 0.017) than CT. However, there were no statistically significant differences in sensitivity (83% vs. 70%) or negative predictive values (96% vs. 92%). No difference in days to final referral diagnosis according to randomization group could be shown (7.2 vs. 7.6 d). However, for the subgroups in which the imaging modality showed a suggestion of malignancy, there was a significant delay to final diagnosis in the CT group compared with the 18F-FDG PET/CT group (11.6 vs. 5.7 d; P = 0.02). Conclusion: Compared with CT, we found a higher diagnostic specificity and accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting cancer in patients with NSSC. 18F-FDG PET/CT should therefore be considered as first-line imaging in this group of patients.
Authors: Sanjay Rao; Elias George Kikano; Daniel Arnold Smith; Ezgi Guler; Sree Harsha Tirumani; Nikhil H Ramaiya Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2021-01-01
Authors: Alexandra M Olaru; Thomas B R Robertson; Jennifer S Lewis; Alex Antony; Wissam Iali; Ryan E Mewis; Simon B Duckett Journal: ChemistryOpen Date: 2017-12-21 Impact factor: 2.911
Authors: Line Jee Hartmann Rasmussen; Martin Schultz; Anne Gaardsting; Steen Ladelund; Peter Garred; Kasper Iversen; Jesper Eugen-Olsen; Morten Helms; Kim Peter David; Andreas Kjaer; Anne-Mette Lebech; Gitte Kronborg Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2017-04-24 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Saman Sargazi; Ushna Laraib; Simge Er; Abbas Rahdar; Mohadeseh Hassanisaadi; Muhammad Nadeem Zafar; Ana M Díez-Pascual; Muhammad Bilal Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) Date: 2022-03-27 Impact factor: 5.076
Authors: Chuen-Yen Lau; Matthew A Adan; Jessica Earhart; Cassie Seamon; Thuy Nguyen; Ariana Savramis; Lindsey Adams; Mary-Elizabeth Zipparo; Erin Madeen; Kristi Huik; Zehava Grossman; Benjamin Chimukangara; Wahyu Nawang Wulan; Corina Millo; Avindra Nath; Bryan R Smith; Ana M Ortega-Villa; Michael Proschan; Bradford J Wood; Dima A Hammoud; Frank Maldarelli Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) Date: 2022-08-22
Authors: Susanne Oksbjerg Dalton; John Brodersen; Christina Sadolin Damhus; Volkert Siersma; Anna Rubach Birkmose Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-01-31 Impact factor: 2.655