Yuji Nakamoto1, Takayoshi Ishimori2, Yoichi Shimizu3, Kohei Sano3, Kaori Togashi2. 1. Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoinkawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. ynakamo1@kuhp.kyoto-u.ac.jp. 2. Department of Diagnostic Imaging and Nuclear Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoinkawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan. 3. Laboratory of Biophysical Chemistry, Kobe Pharmaceutical University, Kobe, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) with 68Ga-labelled 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-N,N',N″,N″'-tetraacetic acid-D-Phe1-Tyr3-octreotide (DOTATOC) has been accepted as a diagnostic imaging tool especially for patients with neuroendocrine tumours. However, its clinical usefulness for restaging of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has not been fully investigated. This retrospective study was performed to elucidate the clinical value of PET/CT using 68Ga-DOTATOC in patients with known or suspected recurrent RCC. METHODS: We analysed 25 consecutive patients who underwent DOTATOC-PET/CT scans after surgery for RCC (23 clear cell, 1 papillary, 1 unclassified). PET/CT findings were reviewed and the detection rate was calculated on a patient and lesion basis. The detectability was compared in patients who also underwent PET/CT scans with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). Histopathological findings or clinical follow-up were used as the reference standard. RESULTS: Based on the final diagnosis, 76 recurrent or metastatic lesions were confirmed in this population. Of these lesions, 66 lesions in 22 patients were positive by DOTATOC-PET/CT. The patient-based and lesion-based sensitivity was 88% (22/25) and 87% (66/76), respectively. Twelve patients underwent both DOTATOC-PET/CT and FDG-PET/CT. The lesion-based sensitivity of DOTATOC was 74% (20/27), while that of FDG was 59% (16/27). Eight lesions were identified only by DOTATOC, but four lesions from papillary RCC were detected only by FDG. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that DOTATOC-PET/CT would be useful for detecting recurrent foci in patients with clear cell RCC. DOTATOC-PET/CT and FDG-PET/CT are considered to have complementary roles.
PURPOSE: Positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) with 68Ga-labelled 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-N,N',N″,N″'-tetraacetic acid-D-Phe1-Tyr3-octreotide (DOTATOC) has been accepted as a diagnostic imaging tool especially for patients with neuroendocrine tumours. However, its clinical usefulness for restaging of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has not been fully investigated. This retrospective study was performed to elucidate the clinical value of PET/CT using 68Ga-DOTATOC in patients with known or suspected recurrent RCC. METHODS: We analysed 25 consecutive patients who underwent DOTATOC-PET/CT scans after surgery for RCC (23 clear cell, 1 papillary, 1 unclassified). PET/CT findings were reviewed and the detection rate was calculated on a patient and lesion basis. The detectability was compared in patients who also underwent PET/CT scans with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). Histopathological findings or clinical follow-up were used as the reference standard. RESULTS: Based on the final diagnosis, 76 recurrent or metastatic lesions were confirmed in this population. Of these lesions, 66 lesions in 22 patients were positive by DOTATOC-PET/CT. The patient-based and lesion-based sensitivity was 88% (22/25) and 87% (66/76), respectively. Twelve patients underwent both DOTATOC-PET/CT and FDG-PET/CT. The lesion-based sensitivity of DOTATOC was 74% (20/27), while that of FDG was 59% (16/27). Eight lesions were identified only by DOTATOC, but four lesions from papillary RCC were detected only by FDG. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that DOTATOC-PET/CT would be useful for detecting recurrent foci in patients with clear cell RCC. DOTATOC-PET/CT and FDG-PET/CT are considered to have complementary roles.
Authors: Francesco Ceci; Christian Uprimny; Bernhard Nilica; Llanos Geraldo; Dorota Kendler; Alexander Kroiss; Jasmin Bektic; Wolfgang Horninger; Peter Lukas; Clemens Decristoforo; Paolo Castellucci; Stefano Fanti; Irene J Virgolini Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Borje Ljungberg; Karim Bensalah; Steven Canfield; Saeed Dabestani; Fabian Hofmann; Milan Hora; Markus A Kuczyk; Thomas Lam; Lorenzo Marconi; Axel S Merseburger; Peter Mulders; Thomas Powles; Michael Staehler; Alessandro Volpe; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Steven P Rowe; Michael A Gorin; Hans J Hammers; M Som Javadi; Hazem Hawasli; Zsolt Szabo; Steve Y Cho; Martin G Pomper; Mohamad E Allaf Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2015-08-19 Impact factor: 2.668