Evaluation of ^sup 18^F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer
PET with 18F-FDG has been widely used in oncology, but its application for stomach neoplasms has been limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer and to generate semiquantitative values for lesio...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978) 2003-05, Vol.44 (5), p.690 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 690 |
container_title | The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978) |
container_volume | 44 |
creator | Yoshioka, Takashi Yamaguchi, Keiichirou Kubota, Kazuo Saginoya, Toshiyuki |
description | PET with 18F-FDG has been widely used in oncology, but its application for stomach neoplasms has been limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer and to generate semiquantitative values for lesions. 18F-FDG PET scans were obtained on 42 patients (29 men, 13 women; age, 27-78 y; median age, 63 y): 20 patients with a PT931/04 scanner and 22 patients with a SET2400W scanner. The PT931/04 has a spatial resolution of 6.0 mm at full width at half maximum (FWHM) and covers 15 cm above and below the targeted lesion, and the SET2400W has a spatial resolution of 3.9 mm at FWHM and images the entire body. All PET images were interpreted visually, and tracer uptakes were quantitated as standardized uptake values (SUVs) on SET2400W images. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy as a whole were as follows: 71%, 74%, and 73%, respectively, with the SET2400W scanner and 47%, 79%, and 62%, respectively, with the PT931/04 scanner. Values were high for primary lesions, liver, lymph node, and lung metastases, but were low for bone metastases, ascites, peritonitis, and pleuritis carcinomatoses. SUVs were 8.9 +/- 4.2 (primary lesions, 19 patients/19 lesions), 6.5 +/- 2.2 (liver, 9/55), 6.1 +/- 2.5 (lymph nodes, 14/38), 6.5 +/- 1.8 (abdominal wall, 4/7), 3.9 +/- 2.0 (bone, 3/27), and 4.7 +/- 2.6 (lung, 2/3). Comparing SUVs and histologic findings for 17 untreated patients, values for well-differentiated and moderately differentiated adenocarcinomas versus poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas and signet ring cell carcinomas were 13.2 +/- 6.3 (4/4) versus 7.7 +/- 2.6 (13/13) (P < 0.05) for the primary lesions, 7.0 +/- 2.4 (5/39) versus 5.6 +/- 2.8 (2/2) for the liver, and 5.5 +/- 1.9 (9/28) versus 8.8 +/- 3.3 (3/8) (P < 0.05) for the lymph nodes. Our results indicate that 18F-FDG PET is a useful diagnostic modality for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer but not for detecting bone metastases, peritonitis, or pleuritis carcinomatoses. 18F-FDG uptake by gastric cancers is relatively high but does not parallel histopathologic features of malignancy. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_219270930</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>392052651</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_2192709303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNyksOgjAUheHGaCI-9nDjGJJW0gpjBR06YAyptShEW-wDt29NXICjk5z_m6CI0JQmlLHdFEWYMJJQiukcLaztMcYsy7IIXYqRPzx3nVagW6itH4BkdZmUhyOciwo6BUPIUjkL787dgV9HroS8xvCUjlsXoohBGzBSeGMChFu4TSdAfKFZoVnLH1auf7tEm7Ko9qdkMPrlpXVNr71RITVbkm93OE9x-hf6ADBjRRU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>219270930</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of ^sup 18^F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Yoshioka, Takashi ; Yamaguchi, Keiichirou ; Kubota, Kazuo ; Saginoya, Toshiyuki</creator><creatorcontrib>Yoshioka, Takashi ; Yamaguchi, Keiichirou ; Kubota, Kazuo ; Saginoya, Toshiyuki</creatorcontrib><description>PET with 18F-FDG has been widely used in oncology, but its application for stomach neoplasms has been limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer and to generate semiquantitative values for lesions. 18F-FDG PET scans were obtained on 42 patients (29 men, 13 women; age, 27-78 y; median age, 63 y): 20 patients with a PT931/04 scanner and 22 patients with a SET2400W scanner. The PT931/04 has a spatial resolution of 6.0 mm at full width at half maximum (FWHM) and covers 15 cm above and below the targeted lesion, and the SET2400W has a spatial resolution of 3.9 mm at FWHM and images the entire body. All PET images were interpreted visually, and tracer uptakes were quantitated as standardized uptake values (SUVs) on SET2400W images. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy as a whole were as follows: 71%, 74%, and 73%, respectively, with the SET2400W scanner and 47%, 79%, and 62%, respectively, with the PT931/04 scanner. Values were high for primary lesions, liver, lymph node, and lung metastases, but were low for bone metastases, ascites, peritonitis, and pleuritis carcinomatoses. SUVs were 8.9 +/- 4.2 (primary lesions, 19 patients/19 lesions), 6.5 +/- 2.2 (liver, 9/55), 6.1 +/- 2.5 (lymph nodes, 14/38), 6.5 +/- 1.8 (abdominal wall, 4/7), 3.9 +/- 2.0 (bone, 3/27), and 4.7 +/- 2.6 (lung, 2/3). Comparing SUVs and histologic findings for 17 untreated patients, values for well-differentiated and moderately differentiated adenocarcinomas versus poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas and signet ring cell carcinomas were 13.2 +/- 6.3 (4/4) versus 7.7 +/- 2.6 (13/13) (P < 0.05) for the primary lesions, 7.0 +/- 2.4 (5/39) versus 5.6 +/- 2.8 (2/2) for the liver, and 5.5 +/- 1.9 (9/28) versus 8.8 +/- 3.3 (3/8) (P < 0.05) for the lymph nodes. Our results indicate that 18F-FDG PET is a useful diagnostic modality for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer but not for detecting bone metastases, peritonitis, or pleuritis carcinomatoses. 18F-FDG uptake by gastric cancers is relatively high but does not parallel histopathologic features of malignancy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0161-5505</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1535-5667</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JNMEAQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Society of Nuclear Medicine</publisher><ispartof>The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978), 2003-05, Vol.44 (5), p.690</ispartof><rights>Copyright Society of Nuclear Medicine May 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Yoshioka, Takashi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamaguchi, Keiichirou</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kubota, Kazuo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saginoya, Toshiyuki</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of ^sup 18^F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer</title><title>The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978)</title><description>PET with 18F-FDG has been widely used in oncology, but its application for stomach neoplasms has been limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer and to generate semiquantitative values for lesions. 18F-FDG PET scans were obtained on 42 patients (29 men, 13 women; age, 27-78 y; median age, 63 y): 20 patients with a PT931/04 scanner and 22 patients with a SET2400W scanner. The PT931/04 has a spatial resolution of 6.0 mm at full width at half maximum (FWHM) and covers 15 cm above and below the targeted lesion, and the SET2400W has a spatial resolution of 3.9 mm at FWHM and images the entire body. All PET images were interpreted visually, and tracer uptakes were quantitated as standardized uptake values (SUVs) on SET2400W images. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy as a whole were as follows: 71%, 74%, and 73%, respectively, with the SET2400W scanner and 47%, 79%, and 62%, respectively, with the PT931/04 scanner. Values were high for primary lesions, liver, lymph node, and lung metastases, but were low for bone metastases, ascites, peritonitis, and pleuritis carcinomatoses. SUVs were 8.9 +/- 4.2 (primary lesions, 19 patients/19 lesions), 6.5 +/- 2.2 (liver, 9/55), 6.1 +/- 2.5 (lymph nodes, 14/38), 6.5 +/- 1.8 (abdominal wall, 4/7), 3.9 +/- 2.0 (bone, 3/27), and 4.7 +/- 2.6 (lung, 2/3). Comparing SUVs and histologic findings for 17 untreated patients, values for well-differentiated and moderately differentiated adenocarcinomas versus poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas and signet ring cell carcinomas were 13.2 +/- 6.3 (4/4) versus 7.7 +/- 2.6 (13/13) (P < 0.05) for the primary lesions, 7.0 +/- 2.4 (5/39) versus 5.6 +/- 2.8 (2/2) for the liver, and 5.5 +/- 1.9 (9/28) versus 8.8 +/- 3.3 (3/8) (P < 0.05) for the lymph nodes. Our results indicate that 18F-FDG PET is a useful diagnostic modality for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer but not for detecting bone metastases, peritonitis, or pleuritis carcinomatoses. 18F-FDG uptake by gastric cancers is relatively high but does not parallel histopathologic features of malignancy.</description><issn>0161-5505</issn><issn>1535-5667</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNyksOgjAUheHGaCI-9nDjGJJW0gpjBR06YAyptShEW-wDt29NXICjk5z_m6CI0JQmlLHdFEWYMJJQiukcLaztMcYsy7IIXYqRPzx3nVagW6itH4BkdZmUhyOciwo6BUPIUjkL787dgV9HroS8xvCUjlsXoohBGzBSeGMChFu4TSdAfKFZoVnLH1auf7tEm7Ko9qdkMPrlpXVNr71RITVbkm93OE9x-hf6ADBjRRU</recordid><startdate>20030501</startdate><enddate>20030501</enddate><creator>Yoshioka, Takashi</creator><creator>Yamaguchi, Keiichirou</creator><creator>Kubota, Kazuo</creator><creator>Saginoya, Toshiyuki</creator><general>Society of Nuclear Medicine</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7Z</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030501</creationdate><title>Evaluation of ^sup 18^F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer</title><author>Yoshioka, Takashi ; Yamaguchi, Keiichirou ; Kubota, Kazuo ; Saginoya, Toshiyuki</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_2192709303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Yoshioka, Takashi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamaguchi, Keiichirou</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kubota, Kazuo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saginoya, Toshiyuki</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biochemistry Abstracts 1</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Yoshioka, Takashi</au><au>Yamaguchi, Keiichirou</au><au>Kubota, Kazuo</au><au>Saginoya, Toshiyuki</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of ^sup 18^F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978)</jtitle><date>2003-05-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>690</spage><pages>690-</pages><issn>0161-5505</issn><eissn>1535-5667</eissn><coden>JNMEAQ</coden><abstract>PET with 18F-FDG has been widely used in oncology, but its application for stomach neoplasms has been limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDG PET for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer and to generate semiquantitative values for lesions. 18F-FDG PET scans were obtained on 42 patients (29 men, 13 women; age, 27-78 y; median age, 63 y): 20 patients with a PT931/04 scanner and 22 patients with a SET2400W scanner. The PT931/04 has a spatial resolution of 6.0 mm at full width at half maximum (FWHM) and covers 15 cm above and below the targeted lesion, and the SET2400W has a spatial resolution of 3.9 mm at FWHM and images the entire body. All PET images were interpreted visually, and tracer uptakes were quantitated as standardized uptake values (SUVs) on SET2400W images. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy as a whole were as follows: 71%, 74%, and 73%, respectively, with the SET2400W scanner and 47%, 79%, and 62%, respectively, with the PT931/04 scanner. Values were high for primary lesions, liver, lymph node, and lung metastases, but were low for bone metastases, ascites, peritonitis, and pleuritis carcinomatoses. SUVs were 8.9 +/- 4.2 (primary lesions, 19 patients/19 lesions), 6.5 +/- 2.2 (liver, 9/55), 6.1 +/- 2.5 (lymph nodes, 14/38), 6.5 +/- 1.8 (abdominal wall, 4/7), 3.9 +/- 2.0 (bone, 3/27), and 4.7 +/- 2.6 (lung, 2/3). Comparing SUVs and histologic findings for 17 untreated patients, values for well-differentiated and moderately differentiated adenocarcinomas versus poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas and signet ring cell carcinomas were 13.2 +/- 6.3 (4/4) versus 7.7 +/- 2.6 (13/13) (P < 0.05) for the primary lesions, 7.0 +/- 2.4 (5/39) versus 5.6 +/- 2.8 (2/2) for the liver, and 5.5 +/- 1.9 (9/28) versus 8.8 +/- 3.3 (3/8) (P < 0.05) for the lymph nodes. Our results indicate that 18F-FDG PET is a useful diagnostic modality for advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer but not for detecting bone metastases, peritonitis, or pleuritis carcinomatoses. 18F-FDG uptake by gastric cancers is relatively high but does not parallel histopathologic features of malignancy.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Society of Nuclear Medicine</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0161-5505 |
ispartof | The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978), 2003-05, Vol.44 (5), p.690 |
issn | 0161-5505 1535-5667 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_219270930 |
source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
title | Evaluation of ^sup 18^F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T21%3A07%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20%5Esup%2018%5EF-FDG%20PET%20in%20patients%20with%20advanced,%20metastatic,%20or%20recurrent%20gastric%20cancer&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20nuclear%20medicine%20(1978)&rft.au=Yoshioka,%20Takashi&rft.date=2003-05-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=690&rft.pages=690-&rft.issn=0161-5505&rft.eissn=1535-5667&rft.coden=JNMEAQ&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E392052651%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=219270930&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |