Silvia Taralli1, Valentina Scolozzi1,2, Massimiliano Foti2, Sara Ricciardi3, Anna Rita Forcione4, Giuseppe Cardillo4, Maria Lucia Calcagni5,6. 1. Nuclear Medicine Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Largo Francesco Vito, 1, 00168, Roma, Italia. 2. Nuclear Medicine Institute, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia. 3. Unit of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. 4. Unit of Thoracic Surgery, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy. 5. Nuclear Medicine Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Largo Francesco Vito, 1, 00168, Roma, Italia. marialucia.calcagni@unicatt.it. 6. Nuclear Medicine Institute, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italia. marialucia.calcagni@unicatt.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In oncological patients, 18F-FDG PET/CT performance for pulmonary nodules' characterization is not well-established. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the 18F-FDG PET/CT diagnostic performance in pulmonary nodules detected during follow-up in oncological patients and the relationship between malignancy and nodules' characteristics. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 182 pulmonary nodules (121 solitary, 61 multiple; mean size = 16.5 ± 8.1 mm, mean SUVmax = 5.2 ± 5.1) in 148 oncological patients (89 males; mean age = 69.5 ± 8.4 years). Final diagnosis was established by histology or radiological follow-up. Diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG visual analysis (malignancy-criterion: uptake ≥ mediastinal activity), ROC curve analysis for SUVmax and nodules' characteristics were assessed. RESULTS: In 182 nodules, the prevalence of malignancy was 75.8%; PET/CT provided sensitivity = 79%, specificity = 81.8%, accuracy = 79.7%, PPV = 93.1%, NPV = 55.4%; ROC analysis (SUVmax cut-off = 1.7) provided sensitivity = 85.5%, specificity = 72.7%. In 121 solitary nodules, the prevalence of malignancy was 87.6%; PET/CT provided sensitivity = 82.1%, specificity = 73.3%, accuracy = 81%, PPV = 95.6%, NPV = 36.7%; ROC analysis (SUVmax cut-off = 2) provided sensitivity = 84%, specificity = 80%. In 61 multiple nodules, the prevalence of malignancy was 52.5%; PET/CT (nodule and patient-based analysis, respectively) provided sensitivity = 68.7% and 88.9%, specificity = 86.2% and 55.6%, accuracy = 77% and 77.8%, PPV = 84.4% and 80%, NPV = 71.8% and 71.5%; ROC analysis (nodule-based, SUVmax cut-off = 1.8) provided sensitivity = 71.9%, specificity = 82.8%. Malignant nodules were prevalent in males, in solitary pattern and in upper lobes, and had significantly greater size and metabolic activity (SUVmax and TLG) than benign ones, with no differences in interval-time between previous cancer diagnosis and nodule detection, patients' age or other nodules' features (lung side, central/peripheral). When comparing solitary and multiple patterns, malignant nodules had significantly greater size and metabolic activity than benign ones in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In oncological patients, 18F-FDG PET/CT provides good diagnostic performance for ruling in the malignancy in pulmonary nodules detected during follow-up, even at small size and especially when solitary. In multiple patterns, PET seems useful in the perspective of a personalized management, for identifying the "reference" nodule deserving histological assessment.
PURPOSE: In oncological patients, 18F-FDG PET/CT performance for pulmonary nodules' characterization is not well-established. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the 18F-FDG PET/CT diagnostic performance in pulmonary nodules detected during follow-up in oncological patients and the relationship between malignancy and nodules' characteristics. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 182 pulmonary nodules (121 solitary, 61 multiple; mean size = 16.5 ± 8.1 mm, mean SUVmax = 5.2 ± 5.1) in 148 oncological patients (89 males; mean age = 69.5 ± 8.4 years). Final diagnosis was established by histology or radiological follow-up. Diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG visual analysis (malignancy-criterion: uptake ≥ mediastinal activity), ROC curve analysis for SUVmax and nodules' characteristics were assessed. RESULTS: In 182 nodules, the prevalence of malignancy was 75.8%; PET/CT provided sensitivity = 79%, specificity = 81.8%, accuracy = 79.7%, PPV = 93.1%, NPV = 55.4%; ROC analysis (SUVmax cut-off = 1.7) provided sensitivity = 85.5%, specificity = 72.7%. In 121 solitary nodules, the prevalence of malignancy was 87.6%; PET/CT provided sensitivity = 82.1%, specificity = 73.3%, accuracy = 81%, PPV = 95.6%, NPV = 36.7%; ROC analysis (SUVmax cut-off = 2) provided sensitivity = 84%, specificity = 80%. In 61 multiple nodules, the prevalence of malignancy was 52.5%; PET/CT (nodule and patient-based analysis, respectively) provided sensitivity = 68.7% and 88.9%, specificity = 86.2% and 55.6%, accuracy = 77% and 77.8%, PPV = 84.4% and 80%, NPV = 71.8% and 71.5%; ROC analysis (nodule-based, SUVmax cut-off = 1.8) provided sensitivity = 71.9%, specificity = 82.8%. Malignant nodules were prevalent in males, in solitary pattern and in upper lobes, and had significantly greater size and metabolic activity (SUVmax and TLG) than benign ones, with no differences in interval-time between previous cancer diagnosis and nodule detection, patients' age or other nodules' features (lung side, central/peripheral). When comparing solitary and multiple patterns, malignant nodules had significantly greater size and metabolic activity than benign ones in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In oncological patients, 18F-FDG PET/CT provides good diagnostic performance for ruling in the malignancy in pulmonary nodules detected during follow-up, even at small size and especially when solitary. In multiple patterns, PET seems useful in the perspective of a personalized management, for identifying the "reference" nodule deserving histological assessment.
Entities:
Keywords:
18F-FDG; Metabolic characterization; PET/CT; Previous cancer history; Pulmonary nodule
Authors: Annette McWilliams; Martin C Tammemagi; John R Mayo; Heidi Roberts; Geoffrey Liu; Kam Soghrati; Kazuhiro Yasufuku; Simon Martel; Francis Laberge; Michel Gingras; Sukhinder Atkar-Khattra; Christine D Berg; Ken Evans; Richard Finley; John Yee; John English; Paola Nasute; John Goffin; Serge Puksa; Lori Stewart; Scott Tsai; Michael R Johnston; Daria Manos; Garth Nicholas; Glenwood D Goss; Jean M Seely; Kayvan Amjadi; Alain Tremblay; Paul Burrowes; Paul MacEachern; Rick Bhatia; Ming-Sound Tsao; Stephen Lam Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: O Rena; F Davoli; R Boldorini; A Roncon; G Baietto; E Papalia; D Turello; F Massera; C Casadio Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2013-08-24 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Elske Quak; Pierre-Yves Le Roux; Michael S Hofman; Philippe Robin; David Bourhis; Jason Callahan; David Binns; Cédric Desmonts; Pierre-Yves Salaun; Rodney J Hicks; Nicolas Aide Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-07-30 Impact factor: 9.236