Literature DB >> 30242338

Association of Fludeoxyglucose F 18-Labeled Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography With the Detection of Oropharyngeal Cancer Recurrence.

Shanmugappiriya Sivarajah1, Andre Isaac1, Tim Cooper1, Han Zhang1,2, Lakshmi Puttagunta3, Jonathan Abele1,4, Vincent Biron1,5, Jeffery Harris1, Hadi Seikaly1, Daniel A O' Connell1.   

Abstract

Importance: No guidelines at present describe when fludeoxyglucose F 18-labeled positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG PET-CT) should be used in the initial posttreatment period for evaluation of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma treatment outcome and recurrence. Objective: To compare accuracies of the initial posttreatment PET-CT between primary treatment groups and to define indicators of false-positive findings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study identified adults with a new diagnosis of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma who received treatment with curative intent from October 1, 2006, through November 30, 2016, using the Alberta Cancer Registry (n = 380). Patients who underwent PET-CT within 1 year of treatment completion were included (n = 190). Of these, 103 patients (54.2%) had PET-CT findings positive for residual or recurrent disease, and 61 (32.1%) had false-positive findings. Among the 61 patients, 42 (68.9%) had received chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and 19 (31.1%) had primary surgery. Forty-two patients had true-positive findings, indicating a prevalence rate of disease of 22.1%. Data were analyzed from July through October 2017. Exposures: One of 2 primary treatment modalities (surgery with or without adjuvant therapy vs CRT). All patients had posttreatment FDG PET-CT. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome measures included the diagnostic odds ratio, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of PET-CT for detecting residual and/or recurrent disease. A multivariate analysis determined indicators of false-positive findings. Discriminative ability was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) metabolic data.
Results: Of the 190 participants, 77.9% were men, with a mean (SD) age at diagnosis of 58.5 (8.5) years. The diagnostic odds ratio was 19.3 (95% CI, 5.7-65.1); pooled sensitivity, 93.3% (95% CI, 80.7%-98.3%); and pooled specificity, 57.9% (95% CI, 49.4%-66.0%). The PPV of detecting disease was 54.7% (95% CI, 38.8%-69.8%) for primary surgery and 31.1% (95% CI, 20.2%-44.4%) for CRT. The NPV was 100% (95% CI, 94.7%-100%) for primary surgery and 96.6% (95% CI, 89.5%-99.1%) for CRT. Multivariate analysis identified treatment type, p16 disease, and smoking status as indicative of false-positive findings. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for primary tumors, the optimal cutoff SUVmax for indicating true- vs false-positive results was 5.1 for surgically treated patients (area under the curve, 0.729; 95% CI, 0.570-0.888) and 5.3 for patients treated with CRT (area under the curve, 0.844; 95% CI, 0.700-0.989). Conclusions and Relevance: The results indicate a higher specificity for FDG PET-CT for initial posttreatment surveillance imaging among patients treated with primary surgery compared with nonsurgical management. Both sets of patients with posttreatment FDG PET-CT findings with an SUVmax greater than 5.0 should undergo close evaluation for possible residual or recurrent disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30242338      PMCID: PMC6248186          DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2018.2143

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg        ISSN: 2168-6181            Impact factor:   6.223


  22 in total

1.  Role of primary surgery in the treatment of advanced oropharyngeal cancer.

Authors:  Hadi Seikaly; Vincent L Biron; Han Zhang; Daniel A O'Connell; David W J Côté; Khalid Ansari; David C Williams; Lakshmi Puttagunta; Jeffrey R Harris
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 3.147

2.  Positron emission tomography/computed tomography after primary transoral robotic surgery for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Kealan Hobelmann; Adam Luginbuhl; Voichita Bar-Ad; William Keane; Joseph Curry; David Cognetti
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 3.325

Review 3.  Detecting Residual/Recurrent Head Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas Using PET or PET/CT: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Phylannie K F Cheung; Ronald Y Chin; Guy D Eslick
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 3.497

4.  The effect of three dimensional activity distribution on the dose planning of radioimmunotherapy for patients with advanced intraperitoneal pseudomyxoma.

Authors:  J O Laitinen; K J Kairemo; A P Jekunen; T Korppi-Tommola; M Tenhunen
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1997-12-15       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  FDG PET/CT in Patients With Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma After Primary Surgical Resection With or Without Chemoradiation Therapy.

Authors:  Mehdi Taghipour; Sara Sheikhbahaei; Rick Wray; Nishant Agrawal; Jeremy Richmon; Hyunseok Kang; Rathan M Subramaniam
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 6.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of positron emission tomography in the follow up of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma following radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  M G Isles; C McConkey; H M Mehanna
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.597

7.  Lesion regression rate based on RECIST: prediction of treatment outcome in patients with head and neck cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy compared with FDG PET-CT.

Authors:  Munetaka Matoba; Hiroyuki Tuji; Yuzo Shimode; Tamaki Kondo; Kiyotaka Oota; Hisao Tonami
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.724

Review 8.  Surveillance radiologic imaging after treatment of oropharyngeal cancer: a review.

Authors:  Steven J Wang
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 2.754

9.  Understanding and using sensitivity, specificity and predictive values.

Authors:  Rajul Parikh; Annie Mathai; Shefali Parikh; G Chandra Sekhar; Ravi Thomas
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.848

Review 10.  Follow-up in Head and Neck Cancer: Do More Does It Mean Do Better? A Systematic Review and Our Proposal Based on Our Experience.

Authors:  Nerina Denaro; Marco Carlo Merlano; Elvio Grazioso Russi
Journal:  Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-06-25       Impact factor: 3.372

View more
  2 in total

1.  Imaging at diagnosis impacts cancer-specific survival among patients with cancer of the oropharynx.

Authors:  Rustain L Morgan; Megan M Eguchi; Adam C Mueller; Stacie L Daugherty; Arya Amini; Sana D Karam
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Discordance Between Oncology Clinician-Perceived and Radiologist-Intended Meaning of the Postradiotherapy Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography Freeform Report for Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  Zachary Patel; Jennifer A Schroeder; Paul M Bunch; Joni K Evans; Cole R Steber; Adam G Johnson; Joshua C Farris; Ryan T Hughes
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2022-10-01       Impact factor: 8.961

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.