The Multicenter Italian Trial Assesses the Performance of FDG-PET /CT Related to Pre-Test Cancer Risk in Patients with Solitary Pulmonary Nodules and Introduces a Segmental Thoracic Diagnostic Strategy.
Adult
Aged
Female
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
Humans
Italy
Lung Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Male
Middle Aged
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography
/ methods
Radiation Exposure
Radiopharmaceuticals
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Sensitivity and Specificity
Solitary Pulmonary Nodule
/ diagnostic imaging
FDG
Lung cancer
PET/CT
likelihood
single pulmonary nodules
Journal
Current radiopharmaceuticals
ISSN: 1874-4729
Titre abrégé: Curr Radiopharm
Pays: United Arab Emirates
ID NLM: 101468718
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
09
01
2019
revised:
13
02
2019
accepted:
11
11
2019
pubmed:
19
3
2020
medline:
3
9
2021
entrez:
19
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Italian Tailored Assessment of Lung Indeterminate Accidental Nodule (ITALIAN) trial is a trial drawn to determine the performance of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in patients with solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN), stratified for a different kind of risk. An additional end-point was to compare the diagnostic information and estimated dosimetry, provided by a segmental PET/CT (s-PET/CT) acquisition instead of a whole body PET/CT (wb-PET/CT), in order to evaluate if segmental thoracic PET/CT can be used in patients with SPN. 18F-FDG PET/CT of 502 patients, stratified for pre-test cancer risk, was retrospectively analyzed. FDG uptake in SPN was assessed by a 4-point scoring (4PS) system and a semiquantitative analysis using the ratio between SUVmax in SPN and SUVmean in mediastinal blood pool (BP), and between SUVmax in SPN and SUVmean in the liver (L). Histopathology and/or follow-up data were used as a standard of reference. Data obtained on the thoracic part of wb-PET/CT, defined as s - PET/CT, were compared with those deriving from wb-PET/CT. SPNs were malignant in 180 patients (36%), benign in 175 (35%), and indeterminate in 147 (29%). The 355 patients diagnosed with a definitive SPN nature (malignant or benign) were considered for the analysis of PET performance. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values, and accuracy were 85.6%, 85.7%, 86%, 85.2%, and 85.6%, respectively. Sensitivity and PPV were higher in intermediate and high-risk patients. 18F-FDG uptake indicative of thoracic and extra-thoracic lesions was detectable in 13% and 3% of the patients. Compared to wb-PET/CT, s-PET/CT could save about 2/3 of 18F-FDG dose, radiation exposure or scan-time, without affecting the clinical impact of PET/CT. In patients with SPN, the pre-test likelihood of malignancy stratification allows to better define PET clinical setting and its diagnostic power. In subjects with low-intermediate pre-test likelihood of malignancy, s-PET/CT might be planned in advance. The adoption of this segmental strategy could reduce radiation exposure, scan-time, and might allow individually targeted protocols.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32186274
pii: CRP-EPUB-105350
doi: 10.2174/1874471013666200318142210
pmc: PMC8206189
doi:
Substances chimiques
Radiopharmaceuticals
0
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
0Z5B2CJX4D
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
243-248Informations de copyright
Copyright© Bentham Science Publishers; For any queries, please email at epub@benthamscience.net.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 4;365(5):395-409
pubmed: 21714641
Chest. 2003 Nov;124(5):1828-33
pubmed: 14605056
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017 Feb;44(2):346-347
pubmed: 27909768
Chest. 2013 May;143(5 Suppl):e93S-e120S
pubmed: 23649456
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017 Jan;44(1):5-7
pubmed: 27624189
Radiology. 2008 Mar;246(3):772-82
pubmed: 18235105
Lancet Oncol. 2011 Sep;12(10):933-80
pubmed: 21958503
Radiology. 2008 Mar;246(3):697-722
pubmed: 18195376
J Nucl Med. 2006 May;47(5):885-95
pubmed: 16644760
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018 Oct;45(11):1898-1907
pubmed: 29736699
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2013 Dec;3(6):316-26
pubmed: 24404446
N Engl J Med. 2009 Mar 5;360(10):1030-7
pubmed: 19264694
Radiology. 2005 Nov;237(2):395-400
pubmed: 16244247
JAMA. 2001 Feb 21;285(7):914-24
pubmed: 11180735
N Engl J Med. 2013 Sep 5;369(10):910-9
pubmed: 24004118
Radiol Med. 2016 Mar;121(3):218-24
pubmed: 26541882
Thorax. 2015 Aug;70 Suppl 2:ii1-ii54
pubmed: 26082159
Eur J Radiol. 2015 Oct;84(10):2032-7
pubmed: 26094866
Eur J Radiol. 2017 May;90:188-191
pubmed: 28583632
J Nucl Med. 2008 Feb;49(2):179-85
pubmed: 18199626
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017 Jan;44(1):1-4
pubmed: 27695909
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Feb 1;174(2):269-74
pubmed: 24322569
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015 Feb;42(2):328-54
pubmed: 25452219
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017 Aug;44(Suppl 1):4-16
pubmed: 28687866