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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of nuclear medicine (1978) 2003-05, Vol.44 (5), p.690
Hauptverfasser: Yoshioka, Takashi, Yamaguchi, Keiichirou, Kubota, Kazuo, Saginoya, Toshiyuki
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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; 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 &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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