| Literature DB >> 30210633 |
Rajiv Rai Sookha1, Wenhua Zhi1, Yanxia Shen2, Cordelle Lazare1, Ling Wang1, Yifan Meng1, Canhui Cao1, Junbo Hu1, Peng Wu1.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this retrospective study was to investigate the role of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) and evaluate if combined elevated serum tumor markers levels improve the accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting recurrence of cervical squamous cell carcinoma.Entities:
Keywords: 18F-FDG PET/CT; Cervical cancer; carcinoembryonic antigen; recurrence; squamous cell carcinoma antigen
Year: 2018 PMID: 30210633 PMCID: PMC6134808 DOI: 10.7150/jca.27206
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cancer ISSN: 1837-9664 Impact factor: 4.207
Figure 1Flowchart illustrating methods of enrolling patients in the study.
Characteristics of patients enrolled in the study.
| Characteristics | n |
|---|---|
| Total patients | 42 |
| Age (years) | 47.62 (26-67) |
| Pathology | |
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 42 |
| Stage | |
| IA | 2 |
| IB | 13 |
| IIA | 5 |
| IIB | 15 |
| IIIA | 1 |
| IIIB | 5 |
| IVA | 1 |
| Primary treatment | |
| Conization | 1 |
| Radical hysterectomy | 5 |
| Radical hysterectomy + Chemotherapy | 2 |
| Radical hysterectomy + Radiotherapy | 8 |
| Radical hysterectomy + Concurrent chemoradiotherapy | 2 |
| Neoadjuvant chemotherapy + Radical hysterectomy + concurrent chemoradiotherapy | 17 |
| Concurrent chemoradiotherapy | 7 |
| Interval | |
| Last treatment to suspicion of recurrence (months) | 40.6 (6-150) |
| Suspicion of recurrence to PET/CT (days) | 4.1 (0-12) |
| Elevated tumor markers | |
| SCC Ag only | 10 |
| CEA only | 6 |
| SCC Ag and CEA | 8 |
| None | 18 |
| Confirmation of diagnosis | |
| Biopsy | 18 |
| Imaging (CT/MRI) | 16 |
| Tumor markers | 1 |
| Follow-up | 4 |
| Second look surgery | 3 |
SCC Ag, squamous cell carcinoma antigen; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen
CT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging
Comparative analysis of 18F-FDG PET/CT patient-based performance of 42 treated cervical cancer patients in comparison with tumor markers.
| Elevated tumor markers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCC Ag | CEA | SCC Ag + CEA | None | Total | |
| TP | 9 | 2 | 8 | 6 | 25 |
| TN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
| FP | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| FN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 10 | 6 | 8 | 18 | 42 |
| Sensitivity (%) | 100 | ||||
| Specificity (%) | 70.6 | ||||
| Accuracy (%) | 88.1 | ||||
| PPV (%) | 83.3 | ||||
| NPV (%) | 100 | ||||
| Positive likelihood ratio | 3.4 | ||||
| Negative likelihood ratio | 0 | ||||
SCC Ag, squamous cell carcinoma antigen; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen
TP, true positive; TN, true negative; FP, false positive; FN, false negative
PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value
*1 primary adenocarcinoma of lung included
Location of pathological 18F-FDG uptake in true positive cases.
| Sites of abnormal 18F-FDG uptake | n |
|---|---|
| Vaginal stump | 3 |
| Pelvic lymph nodes | 10 |
| Inguinal lymph nodes | 2 |
| Parametrium | 2 |
| Para-aortic lymph nodes | 1 |
| Peritoneal deposits | 2 |
| Colonic metastases | 1 |
| Liver metastases | 5 |
| Mediastinal lymph nodes | 4 |
| Pulmonary metastases | 2 |
18F-FDG, 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose
Characteristics of false positive 18F-FDG PET/CT report.
| Tumor marker | Value (ng/ml) | Diagnosis |
|---|---|---|
| SCC Ag | 4.30 | Radiation induced fibrosis |
| CEA | 61.2 | Granulation tissue following neck surgery |
| CEA | 5.50 | Abscess |
| CEA | 7.45 | Radiation induced fibrosis |
| CEA | 31.65 | Abscess |
SCC Ag, squamous cell carcinoma antigen; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen
Figure 2Scatter-plot graphs illustrating the correlation value between various measured parameters. (A) There was a reasonable correlation between SUVmax and SCC Ag levels (r= 0.44). This correlation between SUVmax and SCC Ag levels was statistically significant (p< 0.05). (B) There was a very low correlation between SUVmax and CEA levels (r= 0.23). This correlation between SUVmax and CEA levels was not statistically significant (p= 0.08). (C) There was a meaningless correlation between SCC Ag and CEA levels (r= 0.19). No statistically significant correlation between the two tumor markers was observed (p= 0.23). r, correlation coefficient; SCC Ag, squamous cell carcinoma antigen; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value.
Figure 3Box-plot graphs illustrating the distribution of SCC Ag, CEA and SUV (A) There was statistically significant difference in SCC Ag levels through the recurrence and non-recurrence group (p< 0.05). (B) There was no statistically significant difference in CEA levels through recurrence and non-recurrence group (p=0.55). (C) There was statistically significant difference in SUVmax values through the recurrence and non-recurrence group (p<0.05). SCC Ag, squamous cell carcinoma antigen; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value.