Top

Annals of Nuclear Medicine

Published in:

01-06-2016 | Original Article

Visual and quantitative comparison of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT findings in the detection of pelvic tumor recurrence in colorectal cancer

Authors: Hee Sung Hwang, You Mie Han, Yun Jung Choi, Sung Hye Koh, Hyoung-Chul Park

Published in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine | Issue 5/2016

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to visually and quantitatively compare ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging in determining postoperative pelvic recurrence in colorectal cancer (CRC).

Materials and methods

This retrospective analysis focused on 96 patients (age: mean 62.6 ± 10.5) with surgically resected CRC (time interval after surgery: 19.2 ± 20.4 months). The standard of reference was histopathologic confirmation (n = 27) or imaging follow-up (n = 69). For visual analysis, three independent nuclear physicians interpreted the PET/CT findings. For the quantitative analysis, the normalized standardized uptake values (nSUVs: nSUV_max, nSUV_peak, nSUV_mean) were calculated by applying the mean SUV of a normal liver. We evaluated the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs) for all the quantitative parameters.

Results

Of the 96 patients, 49 showed pelvic recurrence and 47 revealed no tumor recurrence. Sensitivity and specificity were 85.7 and 80.9 %, respectively, for visual analysis, and 65.3 and 83.0 %, respectively, for quantitative analysis. The AUC (0.766, CI: 0.668–0.846) of nSUV_max was largest comparing nSUV_peak and nSUV_mean values, without significant difference (p value >0.316). Sensitivity of lesion detection was superior in visual analysis (p value = 0.02), but specificity was not significantly different (p = 0.80). After inclusive and exclusive combinations, sensitivity and specificity were slightly increased to 89.8 % (p = 0.54) and 91.5 % (p = 0.14), respectively.

Conclusions

Visual interpretation was superior to quantitative analysis in pelvic tumor recurrence in CRC. Though it was possible to improve diagnostic performance through combinatory analysis, the effect was not statistically significant.

Galandiuk S, Wieand HS, Moertel CG, Cha SS, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Pemberton JH, et al. Patterns of recurrence after curative resection of carcinoma of the colon and rectum. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1992;174:27–32.PubMed

Bohm B, Schwenk W, Hucke HP, Stock W. Does methodic long-term follow-up affect survival after curative resection of colorectal carcinoma? Dis Colon Rectum. 1993;36:280–6.CrossRefPubMed

Papachristodoulou A, Kouskos E, Markopoulos C, Karatzas G, Kouraklis G, Kostakis A. Local recurrence after radical surgery for colorectal cancer. Int Surg. 2002;87:19–24.PubMed

Heriot AG, Kumar D. Rectal cancer recurrence: factors and mechanisms. Colorectal Dis. 2000;2:126–36.CrossRefPubMed

Even-Sapir E, Parag Y, Lerman H, Gutman M, Levine C, Rabau M, et al. Detection of recurrence in patients with rectal cancer: Pet/ct after abdominoperineal or anterior resection. Radiology. 2004;232:815–22.CrossRefPubMed

Watanabe M, Sugimura K, Kuroda S, Okizuka H, Ishida T. Ct assessment of postirradiation changes in the rectum and perirectal region. Clin Imaging. 1995;19:182–7.CrossRefPubMed

Pijl ME, Chaoui AS, Wahl RL, van Oostayen JA. Radiology of colorectal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38:887–98.CrossRefPubMed

Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd JE, Schwimmer J, Czernin J, Phelps ME, et al. A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body fdg pet detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1177–89.PubMed

Maas M, Rutten IJ, Nelemans PJ, Lambregts DM, Cappendijk VC, Beets GL, et al. What is the most accurate whole-body imaging modality for assessment of local and distant recurrent disease in colorectal cancer? A meta-analysis: imaging for recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1560–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Kalff V, Hicks RJ, Ware RE, Hogg A, Binns D, McKenzie AF. The clinical impact of ¹⁸f-fdg pet in patients with suspected or confirmed recurrence of colorectal cancer: a prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:492–9.PubMed

11.

Lonneux M, Reffad AM, Detry R, Kartheuser A, Gigot JF, Pauwels S. Fdg-pet improves the staging and selection of patients with recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:915–21.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, Gaitini D, Frenkel A, Kuten A, et al. Clinical performance of pet/ct in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1200–9.PubMed

13.

Lapela M, Eigtved A, Jyrkkio S, Grenman R, Kurki T, Lindholm P, et al. Experience in qualitative and quantitative fdg pet in follow-up of patients with suspected recurrence from head and neck cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2000;36:858–67.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology. 1983;148:839–43.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Shyn PB, Madan R, Wu C, Erturk SM, Silverman SG. Pet/ct pattern analysis for surgical staple line recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer. AJR. 2010;194:414–21.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Whiteford MH, Whiteford HM, Yee LF, Ogunbiyi OA, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, et al. Usefulness of fdg-pet scan in the assessment of suspected metastatic or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:759–67 (discussion 67–70).CrossRefPubMed

18.

Votrubova J, Belohlavek O, Jaruskova M, Oliverius M, Lohynska R, Trskova K, et al. The role of fdg-pet/ct in the detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:779–84.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Smeets P, Ham H, Ceelen W, Boterberg T, Verstraete K, Goethals I. Differentiation between peri-anastomotic inflammatory changes and local recurrence following neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy surgery for colorectal cancer using visual and semiquantitative analysis of pet-ct data. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;54:327–32.PubMed

Title: Visual and quantitative comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT findings in the detection of pelvic tumor recurrence in colorectal cancer
Authors: Hee Sung Hwang
You Mie Han
Yun Jung Choi
Sung Hye Koh
Hyoung-Chul Park
Publication date: 01-06-2016
Publisher: Springer Japan
Published in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine / Issue 5/2016
Print ISSN: 0914-7187
Electronic ISSN: 1864-6433
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-016-1069-8

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Visual and quantitative comparison of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT findings in the detection of pelvic tumor recurrence in colorectal cancer

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2016

Diagnostic value of metabolic heterogeneity as a reliable parameter for differentiating malignant parotid gland tumors

Prognostic value of pre-operative glucose-corrected maximum standardized uptake value in patients with non-small cell lung cancer after complete surgical resection and 5-year follow-up

Perfusion and metabolic scintigraphy with 123I-BMIPP in prognosis of cardiac resynchronization therapy in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy

Evaluation of cytotoxic and tumor targeting capability of 177Lu-DOTATATE-nanoparticles: a trailblazing strategy in peptide receptor radionuclide therapy

Preclinical evaluation of isostructural Tc-99m- and Re-188-folate-Gly-Gly-Cys-Glu for folate receptor-positive tumor targeting

False triggering of an ultraviolet flame detector after 99mTc-MDP injection