Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 9/2022

05-04-2022 | Computed Tomography | Gastrointestinal

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Superiority of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT to [18F]FDG PET/CT in delineating the primary tumor and peritoneal metastasis in initial gastric cancer

Authors: Lilan Fu, Shun Huang, Hubing Wu, Ye Dong, Fei Xie, Ruihe Wu, Kemin Zhou, Ganghua Tang, Wenlan Zhou

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 9/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to compare [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT with [18F]FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of initial gastric cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively compared [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT with [18F]FDG PET/CT in patients with initial gastric cancer from September 2020 to March 2021. Lesion detectability and the uptake of lesions quantified by the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) and target-to-background ratio (TBR) were compared between the two modalities using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Mann–Whitney U test, and McNemar’s chi-square test.

Results

A total of 61 patients (37 males, aged 23–81 years) were included, of which 22 underwent radical gastrectomy. For primary lesions, higher uptake of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 was observed compared to [18F]FDG (median SUVmax, 14.60 vs 4.35, p < 0.001), resulting in higher positive detection using [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT than [18F]FDG PET/CT (95.1% vs 73.8%, p < 0.001), particularly for tumors with signet-ring cell carcinoma (SRCC) (96.4% vs 57.1%, p < 0.001). [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT detected more positive lymph nodes than [18F]FDG PET/CT (637 vs 407). However, both modalities underestimated N staging compared to pathological N staging. [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT showed a higher sensitivity (92.3% vs 53.8%, p = 0.002) and peritoneal cancer index score (18 vs 3, p < 0.001) in peritoneum metastasis and other suspect metastases compared to [18F]FDG PET/CT.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT outperformed [18F]FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of primary tumors with SRCC and peritoneum metastasis in initial gastric cancer. However, no clinically useful improvement was seen in N staging.

Key Points

• The uptake of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 in primary tumor and metastasis was intensely higher than that of [18F]FDG (p < 0.001) in 61 patients with initial gastric cancer.
• [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT had a higher sensitivity detection in primary tumors (95.1% vs 73.8%, p < 0.001) and peritoneal metastases (92.3% vs 53.8%, p = 0.002) than [18F]FDG PET/CT.
• [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT depicted more positive lymph nodes than [18F]FDG PET/CT (637 vs 407); however, both underestimated N staging compared to pathological N staging.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71:209–249CrossRef
2.
Kwee RM, Kwee TC (2009) Imaging in assessing lymph node status in gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 12:6–22CrossRef
3.
Wang Z, Chen JQ (2011) Imaging in assessing hepatic and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer: a systematic review. BMC Gastroenterol 11:19CrossRef
4.
Yun M, Lim JS, Noh SH et al (2005) Lymph node staging of gastric cancer using (18)F-FDG PET: a comparison study with CT. J Nucl Med 46:1582–1588
5.
Findlay JM, Antonowicz S, Segaran A et al (2019) Routinely staging gastric cancer with 18F-FDG PET-CT detects additional metastases and predicts early recurrence and death after surgery. Eur Radiol 29:2490–2498CrossRef
6.
Smyth E, Schöder H, Strong VE et al (2012) A prospective evaluation of the utility of 2-deoxy-2-[(18) F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography in staging locally advanced gastric cancer. Cancer 118:5481–5488CrossRef
7.
Kim SJ, Cho YS, Moon SH et al Primary tumor 18F-FDG avidity affects the performance of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting gastric cancer recurrence. J Nucl Med 57:544–550
8.
Yoshioka T, Yamaguchi K, Kubota K et al (2003) Evaluation of 18F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer. J Nucl Med 44:690–669
9.
Lindner T, Loktev A, Altmann A et al (2018) Development of quinoline-based theranostic ligands for the targeting of fibroblast activation protein. J Nucl Med 59:1415–1422CrossRef
10.
Kratochwil C, Flechsig P, Lindner T et al (2019) (68)Ga-FAPI PET/CT: tracer uptake in 28 different kinds of cancer. J Nucl Med 60:801–805CrossRef
11.
Chen H, Pang Y, Wu J et al (2020) Comparison of [(68)Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 and [(18)F] FDG PET/CT for the diagnosis of primary and metastatic lesions in patients with various types of cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 47:1820–1832CrossRef
12.
Chen H, Zhao L, Ruan D et al (2021) Usefulness of [(68)Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/CT in patients presenting with inconclusive [(18)F]FDG PET/CT findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48:73–86CrossRef
13.
Koerber SA, Staudinger F, Kratochwil C et al (2020) The role of (68)Ga-FAPI PET/CT for patients with malignancies of the lower gastrointestinal tract: first clinical experience. J Nucl Med 61:1331–1336CrossRef
14.
Wang S, Zhou X, Xu X et al (2021) Clinical translational evaluation of Al(18)F-NOTA-FAPI for fibroblast activation protein-targeted tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48:4259–4271CrossRef
15.
Pang Y, Zhao L, Luo Z et al (2021) Comparison of (68)Ga-FAPI and (18)F-FDG uptake in gastric, duodenal, and colorectal cancers. Radiology 298:393–402CrossRef
16.
Qin C, Shao F, Gai Y et al (2022) (68)Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/MR in the evaluation of gastric carcinomas: comparison with (18)F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 63:81–88
17.
Jiang D, Chen X, You Z et al (2021) Comparison of [(68) Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 and [(18)F]-FDG for the detection of primary and metastatic lesions in patients with gastric cancer: a bicentric retrospective study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49(2):732–742
18.
Kuten J, Levine C, Shamni O et al (2022) Head-to-head comparison of [(68)Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 and [(18)F]-FDG PET/CT in evaluating the extent of disease in gastric adenocarcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 49:743–750
19.
Loktev A, Lindner T, Burger EM et al (2019) Development of fibroblast activation protein-targeted radiotracers with improved tumor retention. J Nucl Med 60:1421–1429CrossRef
20.
Jacquet P, Sugarbaker PH (1996) Clinical research methodologies in diagnosis and staging of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancer Treat Res 82:359–374CrossRef
21.
Mukai K, Ishida Y, Okajima K, Isozaki H, Morimoto T, Nishiyama S (2006) Usefulness of preoperative FDG-PET for detection of gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 9:192–196CrossRef
22.
Stahl A, Ott K, Weber WA et al (2003) FDG PET imaging of locally advanced gastric carcinomas: correlation with endoscopic and histopathological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30:288–295CrossRef
23.
Yamada A, Oguchi K, Fukushima M, Imai Y, Kadoya M (2006) Evaluation of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography in gastric carcinoma: relation to histological subtypes, depth of tumor invasion, and glucose transporter-1 expression. Ann Nucl Med 20:597–604CrossRef
24.
Kawamura T, Kusakabe T, Sugino T et al (2001) Expression of glucose transporter-1 in human gastric carcinoma: association with tumor aggressiveness, metastasis, and patient survival. Cancer 92:634–641CrossRef
25.
Tsujimoto H, Sugasawa H, Ono S, Ichikura T, Yamamoto J, Hase K (2010) Has the accuracy of preoperative diagnosis improved in cases of early-stage gastric cancer? World J Surg 34:1840–1866CrossRef
26.
Kim SK, Kang KW, Lee JS et al (2006) Assessment of lymph node metastases using 18F-FDG PET in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33:148–155CrossRef
27.
Kudou M, Kosuga T, Kubota et al (2018). Value of preoperative PET-CT in the prediction of pathological stage of gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 25:1633-1639.
28.
Sadeghi B, Arvieux C, Glehen O et al (2000) Peritoneal carcinomatosis from non-gynecologic malignancies: results of the EVOCAPE 1 multicentric prospective study. Cancer 88:358–363CrossRef
29.
Lim JS, Kim MJ, Yun MJ et al (2006) Comparison of CT and 18F-FDG pet for detecting peritoneal metastasis on the preoperative evaluation for gastric carcinoma. Korean J Radiol 7:249–256CrossRef
30.
Sim SH, Kim YJ, Oh DY et al (2009) The role of PET/CT in detection of gastric cancer recurrence. BMC Cancer 9:73CrossRef
31.
Mo S, Cai G (2016) Multidisciplinary treatment for colorectal peritoneal metastases: review of the literature. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2016:1516259CrossRef
32.
Zhao L, Pang Y, Luo Z et al (2021) Role of [(68)Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/CT in the evaluation of peritoneal carcinomatosis and comparison with [(18)F]-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48:1944–1955
33.
Metadata
Title
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Superiority of [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04/[18F]FAPI-42 PET/CT to [18F]FDG PET/CT in delineating the primary tumor and peritoneal metastasis in initial gastric cancer
Authors
Lilan Fu
Shun Huang
Hubing Wu
Ye Dong
Fei Xie
Ruihe Wu
Kemin Zhou
Ganghua Tang
Wenlan Zhou
Publication date
05-04-2022
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 9/2022
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08743-1

Other articles of this Issue 9/2022

European Radiology 9/2022 Go to the issue

Computed Tomography

Development and validation of a composite score to predict severe forms of ischemic colitis

Nuclear Medicine

Interpretation of 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT in Hodgkin lymphoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors

Neuro

Non-contrast CT markers of intracerebral hematoma expansion: a reliability study

Musculoskeletal

Evaluation of deep learning reconstructed high-resolution 3D lumbar spine MRI

Magnetic Resonance

Significance of different offending vessels and development of a potential screening tool for trigeminal neuralgia

Musculoskeletal

Reinforced cementoplasty for pelvic tumour lesions and pelvic traumatic fractures: preliminary experience