Primeri bilinmeyen maligniteli hastaların değerlendirilmesinde 18F-FDG PET/BT’nin rolü

Year 2020, Volume: 13 Issue: 1, 119 - 127, 21.01.2020

Aziz Gültekin Tarık Şengöz

https://doi.org/10.31362/patd.655998

Abstract

Amaç: Bu retrospektif çalışmanın amacı, 18F-FDG PET/BT'nin primeri bilinmeyen kanserli hastalarda primer kanseri saptamadaki etkinliğini araştırmak ve PET/BT sonuçlarını histopatolojik sonuçlarla karşılaştırmaktır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Kliniğimize primeri bilinmeyen malignite öntanısıyla başvuran ve 18F-FDG PET/BT taraması yapılan 134 hastanın bilgileri hastane bilgi sisteminden incelendi. Bu hastalardan histopatolojik incelemesi tamamlanmış olan 114 tanesinin PET/BT taramaları iki deneyimli nükleer tıp uzmanı tarafından yeniden değerlendirildi. PET/BT sonuçları histopatolojik bulgularla karşılaştırıldı. 18F-FDG PET/BT’ nin sensitivite, spesifite ve doğruluk oranları hesaplandı. Bu hasta serisinde doğrulanmış primeri bilinmeyen kanser oranı hesaplandı.
Bulgular: Çalışmamıza 56 kadın, 58 erkekten oluşan, yaşları 13-90 arasında 114 hasta dahil edildi. Hastaların ortalama yaşı: 60,53±17,04 yıl idi. Histopatolojik olarak 73 (%64) hasta malign, 41 (%36) hasta benign idi. 18F-FDG PET/BT’ye göre primer veya metastatik olarak toplam 83(%73) hasta malign, 31(%27) hasta benign olarak değerlendirildi. 18F-FDG PET/BT histopatolojik olarak malignitesi kanıtlanmış 73 hastanın 65’inde(%89) primer odağı doğru tespit edebildi. 18F-FDG PET/BT, 73 hastanın 8’ inde (% 11) primer tümör bölgesini tanımlayamadı. Bu sekiz hastanın ikisi plazma hücreli myelom, biri multible myelom ve bir hasta lenfoma idi. Bu nedenle 4(%6) hasta doğrulanmış primeri bilinmeyen kanser olarak kabul edildi. Genel olarak, tanısal doğruluk %78, duyarlılık%89, özgüllük%56, pozitif öngörü değeri% 78,5, negatif öngörü değeri% 74 olarak bulundu.
Sonuç: 18F-FDG PET/BT primeri bilinmeyen malignite hastalarında tüm vücut tarama avantajı ve sensitivitesinin yüksek olması nedeniyle primer kanser odağını belirlemede oldukça başarılıdır.

Keywords

Primeri bilinmeyen kanser, florodeoksiglukoz, pozitron emisyon tomografisi

Supporting Institution

Proje desteğinden faydalanılmadı.

Project Number

-

Thanks

Çıkar ilişkisi: Yazarlar çıkar ilişkisi olmadığını beyan ederler.

The role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of patients with cancer of unknown primary

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study is to investigate the efficacy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting primary cancer in patients with cancer of unknown primary and to compare PET/CT results with histopathological results.
Materials and Methods: The data of 134 patients who presented to our clinic with the diagnosis of malignancy with unknown primary and underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT scan were examined from the hospital information system. PET CT scans of 114 of these patients, whose histopathological examination was completed, were re-evaluated by two experienced nuclear medicine specialists. PET/CT results were compared with histopathological findings. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT were calculated. In this patient series, the ratio of the confirmed CUP was calculated.
Results: A total of 114 patients (56 women, 58 men) aged 13-90 years were included in the study. The mean age of the patients was 60.53 ± 17.04 years. Histopathologically, 73 (64%) patients were malignant and 41/114 (36%) patients were benign. According to 18F-FDG PET/CT, 83 (73%) patients were evaluated as malignant and 31 (27%) patients as benign or primary or metastatic. 18F-FDG PET/CT was able to accurately detect primary focus in 65 (89%) of 73 patients with histopathologically confirmed malignancy. 18F-FDG PET / CT could not identify the primary tumor site in 8 (11%) of 73 patients. Two of these eight patients were plasma cell myeloma, one was multible myeloma and one patient was lymphoma. Therefore, 4 (6%) patients were accepted as confirmed cancer of unknown primary. Overall, the diagnostic accuracy was found to be 78%, sensitivity 89%, specificity %56%,positive predictive value %78.5, negative predictive value%74.
Conclusion: 18F-FDG PET/CT is highly successful in determining the primary cancer focus in patients with CUP due to its full body scanning advantage and high sensitivity.

Keywords

cancers of unknown primary, fluorodeoxyglucose

Project Number

-

References

• 1. Oien KA. Pathologic evaluation of unknown primary cancer. Semin Oncol 2009;36:8-37. doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2008.10.009.
• 2. Fizazi K, Greco FA, Pavlidis N, Daugaard G, Oien K, Pentheroudakis G. ESMO Guidelines Committee Cancers of unknown primary site:ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2015;26:133-138. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdv305.
• Wagland R, Bracher M, Drosdowsky A et al. Differences in experiences of care between patients diagnosed with metastatic cancer of known and unknown primaries: mixed-method findings from the 2013 cancer patient experience survey in England. BMJ Open 2017 27;7:e017881. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017881.
• 4. Losa F, Iglesias L, Pané M et al. 2018 consensus statement by the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology on the diagnosis and treatment of cancer of unknown primary. Clin Transl Oncol 2018;20:1361-1372. doi: 10.1007/s12094-018-1899-z.
• 5. Jones W, Allardice G, Scott I, Oien K, Brewster D, Morrison DS. Cancers of unknown primary diagnosed during hospitalization: a population-based study. BMC Cancer 2017;17:85. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3083-1.
• 6. Dyrvig AK, Yderstræde KB, Gerke O et al. Cancer of unknown primary: registered procedures compared with national integrated cancer pathway for illuminating external validity. Medicine(Baltimore) 2017;96:e6693. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000006693.
• 7. Uzunoglu S, Erdogan B, Kodaz H, et al. Unknown primary adenocarcinomas: a single-center experience. Bosn J Basic Med Sci 2016;16:292-297. doi:10.17305/bjbms.2016.1495.
• 8. Qaseem A, Usman N, Jayaraj JS, Janapala RN, Kashif T. Cancer of unknown primary: A review on clinical guidelines in the development and targeted management of patients with the unknown primary site. Cureus 2019;11:e5552. doi: 10.7759/cureus.5552.
• 9. Kwee TC, Kwee RM. Combined FDG-PET/CT for the detection of unknown primary tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2009;19:731-744. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-1194-4.
• 10. Seshadri N, Eswar C,Jayan R. Radiological imaging in cancer of unknown primary. In: Seshadri N, Eswar C, eds. PET/CT in cancer of unknown primary. 1rd ed. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017;15-22
• 11. Yu X, Li X, Song X, et al. Advantages and disadvantages of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in carcinoma of unknown primary. Oncol Lett 2016;12:3785-3792.
• Pawaskar AS, Basu S. Role of 2-Fluoro-2-Deoxyglucose PET/Computed Tomography in carcinoma of unknown primary PET clin. 2015l;10:297-310. doi:10.1016/j.cpet.2015.03.004.
• 13. Gutzeit A, Antoch G, Kühl H, et al. Unknown primary tumors: detection with dual-modality PET/CT--initial experience. Radiology 2005;234:227-234.
• 14. Riaz S, Nawaz MK, Faruqui ZS, Saeed Kazmi SA, Loya A, Bashir H. Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography in the evaluation of carcinoma of unknown primary. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther 2016;25:11-18. doi: 10.4274/mirt.05706.
• 15. Han A, Xue J, Hu M, Zheng J, Wang X. Clinical value of 18F-FDG PET-CT in detecting primary tumor for patients with carcinoma of unknown primary. Cancer Epidemiol 2012;36:470-475. doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2012.03.002.
• 16. Zhao K, Luo XM, Zhou SH, et al. ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography as an effective diagnostic workup in cervical metastasis of carcinoma from an unknown primary tumor. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2012; 27:685-693. doi:10.1089/cbr.2011.1134.
• 17. Fleming AJ Jr, Smith SP Jr, Paul CM, et al. Impact of [18F]-2-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography on previously untreated head and neck cancer patients. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1173-1179.
• 18. Tamam C, Tamam M, Mulazimoglu M. The Accuracy of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of bone lesions of undetermined origin. World J Nucl Med 2016;15:124-129. doi: 10.4103/1450-1147.176885.
• 19. Pelosi E, Pennone M, Deandreis D, Douroukas A, Mancini M, Bisi G. Role of whole body positron emission tomography/computed tomography scan with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with biopsy proven tumor metastases from unknown primary site. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;50:15-22.
• 20. Yapar Z, Kibar M, Yapar AF et al. The value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in carcinoma of an unknown primary: diagnosis and follow-up. Nucl Med Commun 2010;31:59-66. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e328332b340.
• 21. Kwee TC, Basu S, Cheng G, Alavi A. FDG PET/CT in carcinoma of unknown primary.Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37:635-644. doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1295-1296.
• 22. Pavlidis N, Briasoulis E, Hainsworth J, Greco FA. Diagnostic and therapeutic management of cancer of an unknown primary. Eur J Cancer 2003;39:1990-2005.
• 23. Yaylalı O, Kıraç FS, Yüksel D. The role of 18F-FDG PET-CT in the detection of unknown primary malignancy: a retrospective study. Turk J Med Sci 2016;17:474-482. doi: 10.3906/sag-1502-99.
• 24. Cengiz A, Göksel S, Yürekli Y. Diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary. Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther 2018;27:126-132. doi: 10.4274/mirt.64426