Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Molecular Imaging and Biology 1/2011

Open Access 01-02-2011 | Research Article

Impact of Dedicated Brain PET on Intended Patient Management in Participants of the National Oncologic PET Registry

Authors: Bruce E. Hillner, Barry A. Siegel, Anthony F. Shields, Fenghai Duan, Ilana F. Gareen, Lucy Hanna, R. Edward Coleman

Published in: Molecular Imaging and Biology | Issue 1/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

This study seeks to assess the impact of dedicated brain positron emission tomography (PET) with 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose on intended management of patients with primary and metastatic brain tumors.

Procedures

We analyzed demographic characteristics and evaluated change in intended management after PET, using previously described metrics, for patients in the National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) undergoing dedicated brain PET. For cases of primary brain tumors, comparisons to the overall NOPR cohort were made.

Patient Profile

Between December 2006 and April 2009, 509 dedicated brain PET scans were done on 479 patients—367 (72.1%) for suspected or proven primary brain tumors and 142 (27.9%) for brain metastases. Compared with the overall NOPR cohort, subjects in the dedicated brain cohort were younger (41.3% less than 65 years vs. 10.5% overall, p < 0.0001) and more frequently had functional limitations from their cancers (78.6% vs. 62.3% overall; odds ratio (OR) 2.2, 95% CI 1.8–2.8).

Results

The pre-PET patient management plans in the primary brain tumor and metastasis subgroups were similar. A pre-PET plan of tissue biopsy was slightly more frequent than one of the treatments (31.3% vs. 28.6%) in the primary brain tumor subgroup and was more common than in the overall NOPR cohort (14.2%; OR 2.8, 95% CI 2.2–3.5). Changes from treatment to non-treatment also were more frequent than in the overall NOPR cohort (13.4% vs. 7.7%; OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3–2.5).

Conclusions

Among NOPR patients, dedicated brain PET was associated with similar net changes in intended management as in the overall NOPR cohort. However, brain PET patients were younger, more likely to be symptomatic, and less likely to have a change in management from non-treatment to treatment as a post-PET plan.
Literature
4.
go back to reference Hustinx R, Pourdehnad M, Kaschten B, Alavi A (2005) PET imaging for differentiating recurrent brain tumor from radiation necrosis. Radiol Clin North Am 43:35–47CrossRefPubMed Hustinx R, Pourdehnad M, Kaschten B, Alavi A (2005) PET imaging for differentiating recurrent brain tumor from radiation necrosis. Radiol Clin North Am 43:35–47CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Tunis S, Whicher D (2009) The National Oncologic PET Registry: lessons learned for coverage with evidence development. J Am Coll Radiol 6:360–365CrossRefPubMed Tunis S, Whicher D (2009) The National Oncologic PET Registry: lessons learned for coverage with evidence development. J Am Coll Radiol 6:360–365CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Tunis SR, Pearson SD (2006) Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare’s ‘coverage with evidence development’. Health Aff 25:1218–1230CrossRef Tunis SR, Pearson SD (2006) Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare’s ‘coverage with evidence development’. Health Aff 25:1218–1230CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D et al (2008) Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Clin Oncol 26:2155–2161CrossRefPubMed Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D et al (2008) Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Clin Oncol 26:2155–2161CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Shields AF et al (2008) Relationship between cancer type and impact of PET and PET/CT on intended management: findings of the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Nucl Med 49:1928–1935CrossRefPubMed Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Shields AF et al (2008) Relationship between cancer type and impact of PET and PET/CT on intended management: findings of the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Nucl Med 49:1928–1935CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Hillner BE, Liu D, Coleman RE et al (2007) The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR): design and analysis plan. J Nucl Med 48:1901–1908CrossRefPubMed Hillner BE, Liu D, Coleman RE et al (2007) The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR): design and analysis plan. J Nucl Med 48:1901–1908CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Griffeth LK, Rich KM, Dehdashti F et al (1993) Brain metastases from non-central nervous system tumors: evaluation with PET. Radiology 186:37–44PubMed Griffeth LK, Rich KM, Dehdashti F et al (1993) Brain metastases from non-central nervous system tumors: evaluation with PET. Radiology 186:37–44PubMed
14.
go back to reference Rohren EM, Provenzale JM, Barboriak DP, Coleman RE (2003) Screening for cerebral metastases with FDG PET in patients undergoing whole-body staging of non-central nervous system malignancy. Radiology 226:181–187CrossRefPubMed Rohren EM, Provenzale JM, Barboriak DP, Coleman RE (2003) Screening for cerebral metastases with FDG PET in patients undergoing whole-body staging of non-central nervous system malignancy. Radiology 226:181–187CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services. United States Cancer Statistics (USCS): 1999–2006 Cancer Incidence and Mortality Data. Available at: www.cdc.gov/uscs. Accessed August 11, 2010 National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services. United States Cancer Statistics (USCS): 1999–2006 Cancer Incidence and Mortality Data. Available at: www.​cdc.​gov/​uscs. Accessed August 11, 2010
Metadata
Title
Impact of Dedicated Brain PET on Intended Patient Management in Participants of the National Oncologic PET Registry
Authors
Bruce E. Hillner
Barry A. Siegel
Anthony F. Shields
Fenghai Duan
Ilana F. Gareen
Lucy Hanna
R. Edward Coleman
Publication date
01-02-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Molecular Imaging and Biology / Issue 1/2011
Print ISSN: 1536-1632
Electronic ISSN: 1860-2002
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-010-0427-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Molecular Imaging and Biology 1/2011 Go to the issue