Importance: Clinicians rely heavily on fluorodeoxyglucose F18-labeled positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging to evaluate lung nodules suspicious for cancer. We evaluated the performance of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of malignancy in differing populations with varying cancer prevalence. Objective: To determine the performance of FDG-PET/computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing lung malignancy across different populations with varying cancer prevalence. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter retrospective cohort study at 6 academic medical centers and 1 Veterans Affairs facility that comprised a total of 1188 patients with known or suspected lung cancer from 7 different cohorts from 2005 to 2015. Exposures: 18F fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT imaging. Main Outcome and Measures: Final diagnosis of cancer or benign disease was determined by pathological tissue diagnosis or at least 18 months of stable radiographic follow-up. Results: Most patients were male smokers older than 60 years. Overall cancer prevalence was 81% (range by cohort, 50%-95%). The median nodule size was 22 mm (interquartile range, 15-33 mm). Positron emission tomography/CT sensitivity and specificity were 90.1% (95% CI, 88.1%-91.9%) and 39.8% (95% CI, 33.4%-46.5%), respectively. False-positive PET scans occurred in 136 of 1188 patients. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 86.4% (95% CI, 84.2%-88.5%) and 48.7% (95% CI, 41.3%-56.1%), respectively. On logistic regression, larger nodule size and higher population cancer prevalence were both significantly associated with PET accuracy (odds ratio, 1.027; 95% CI, 1.015-1.040 and odds ratio, 1.030; 95% CI, 1.021-1.040, respectively). As the Mayo Clinic model-predicted probability of cancer increased, the sensitivity and positive predictive value of PET/CT imaging increased, whereas the specificity and negative predictive value dropped. Conclusions and Relevance: High false-positive rates were observed across a range of cancer prevalence. Normal PET/CT scans were not found to be reliable indicators of the absence of disease in patients with a high probability of lung cancer. In this population, aggressive tissue acquisition should be prioritized using a comprehensive lung nodule program that emphasizes advanced tissue acquisition techniques such as CT-guided fine-needle aspiration, navigational bronchoscopy, and endobronchial ultrasonography.
Importance: Clinicians rely heavily on fluorodeoxyglucoseF18-labeled positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging to evaluate lung nodules suspicious for cancer. We evaluated the performance of FDG-PET for the diagnosis of malignancy in differing populations with varying cancer prevalence. Objective: To determine the performance of FDG-PET/computed tomography (CT) in diagnosing lung malignancy across different populations with varying cancer prevalence. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter retrospective cohort study at 6 academic medical centers and 1 Veterans Affairs facility that comprised a total of 1188 patients with known or suspected lung cancer from 7 different cohorts from 2005 to 2015. Exposures: 18F fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT imaging. Main Outcome and Measures: Final diagnosis of cancer or benign disease was determined by pathological tissue diagnosis or at least 18 months of stable radiographic follow-up. Results: Most patients were male smokers older than 60 years. Overall cancer prevalence was 81% (range by cohort, 50%-95%). The median nodule size was 22 mm (interquartile range, 15-33 mm). Positron emission tomography/CT sensitivity and specificity were 90.1% (95% CI, 88.1%-91.9%) and 39.8% (95% CI, 33.4%-46.5%), respectively. False-positive PET scans occurred in 136 of 1188 patients. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 86.4% (95% CI, 84.2%-88.5%) and 48.7% (95% CI, 41.3%-56.1%), respectively. On logistic regression, larger nodule size and higher population cancer prevalence were both significantly associated with PET accuracy (odds ratio, 1.027; 95% CI, 1.015-1.040 and odds ratio, 1.030; 95% CI, 1.021-1.040, respectively). As the Mayo Clinic model-predicted probability of cancer increased, the sensitivity and positive predictive value of PET/CT imaging increased, whereas the specificity and negative predictive value dropped. Conclusions and Relevance: High false-positive rates were observed across a range of cancer prevalence. Normal PET/CT scans were not found to be reliable indicators of the absence of disease in patients with a high probability of lung cancer. In this population, aggressive tissue acquisition should be prioritized using a comprehensive lung nodule program that emphasizes advanced tissue acquisition techniques such as CT-guided fine-needle aspiration, navigational bronchoscopy, and endobronchial ultrasonography.
Authors: Heber MacMahon; John H M Austin; Gordon Gamsu; Christian J Herold; James R Jett; David P Naidich; Edward F Patz; Stephen J Swensen Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: M Teresa Coleman; Ray Y Chen; Myungsun Lee; Philana Ling Lin; Lori E Dodd; Pauline Maiello; Laura E Via; Youngran Kim; Gwendolyn Marriner; Veronique Dartois; Charles Scanga; Christopher Janssen; Jing Wang; Edwin Klein; Sang Nae Cho; Clifton E Barry; JoAnne L Flynn Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2014-12-03 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Stephen A Deppen; Jeffrey D Blume; Clark D Kensinger; Ashley M Morgan; Melinda C Aldrich; Pierre P Massion; Ronald C Walker; Melissa L McPheeters; Joe B Putnam; Eric L Grogan Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gerard A Silvestri; Anne V Gonzalez; Michael A Jantz; Mitchell L Margolis; Michael K Gould; Lynn T Tanoue; Loren J Harris; Frank C Detterbeck Journal: Chest Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Julie A Barta; Claudia I Henschke; Raja M Flores; Rowena Yip; David F Yankelevitz; Charles A Powell Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 5.102
Authors: N Gómez-Sáez; I González-Álvarez; J Vilar; I Hernández-Aguado; M L Domingo; M F Lorente; M Pastor-Valero; L A Parker; N Picazo; J Calbo; B Lumbreras Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-06-25 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Michael N Kammer; Dhairya A Lakhani; Aneri B Balar; Sanja L Antic; Amanda K Kussrow; Rebekah L Webster; Shayan Mahapatra; Udaykamal Barad; Chirayu Shah; Thomas Atwater; Brenda Diergaarde; Jun Qian; Alexander Kaizer; Melissa New; Erin Hirsch; William J Feser; Jolene Strong; Matthew Rioth; York E Miller; Yoganand Balagurunathan; Dianna J Rowe; Sherif Helmey; Sheau-Chiann Chen; Joseph Bauza; Stephen A Deppen; Kim Sandler; Fabien Maldonado; Avrum Spira; Ehab Billatos; Matthew B Schabath; Robert J Gillies; David O Wilson; Ronald C Walker; Bennett Landman; Heidi Chen; Eric L Grogan; Anna E Barón; Darryl J Bornhop; Pierre P Massion Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 30.528
Authors: Maren E Shipe; Stephen A Deppen; Shelbi Sullivan; Michael Kammer; Sandra L Starnes; David O Wilson; Pierre P Massion; Eric L Grogan Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2020-07-16 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Rafael Paez; Chirayu Shah; Angelina J Cords; Anel Muterspaugh; John E Helton; Sanja Antic; Rosana Eisenberg; Heidi Chen; Eric L Grogan; Henry C Manning; Ronald C Walker; Pierre P Massion Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-03-16 Impact factor: 3.752