Evaluation of 18F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-glucose Positron Emission Tomography for Gastric Cancer Screening in Asymptomatic Individuals Undergoing Endoscopy

Overview

Journal Br J Cancer

Specialty Oncology

Date 2007 Nov 28

PMID 18040274

Citations 15

Authors

H Shoda

Y Kakugawa

D Saito

T Kozu

T Terauchi

H Daisaki

C Hamashima

Y Muramatsu

N Moriyama

H Saito

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

(18)F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-glucose Positron Emission Tomography (FDG-PET) has been recently proposed as a promising cancer-screening test. However, the validity of FDG-PET in cancer screening has not been evaluated. We investigated the sensitivity of FDG-PET compared with upper gastric endoscopy in gastric cancer screening for asymptomatic individuals. A total of 2861 consecutive subjects (1600 men and 1261 women) who were asymptomatic and who underwent both FDG-PET and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy between 1 February 2004 and 31 January 2005 were included in this study. Both endoscopists and a radiologist were unaware of the results of the other diagnostic tests. The FDG-PET images were examined using criteria determined by the pattern of FDG accumulation. Sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET were calculated compared with endoscopic diagnosis as the gold standard. Among 2861 subjects enrolled in the study, there were 20 subjects with gastric cancer, of whom 18 were T1 in depth of cancer invasion. Positive FDG-PET results were obtained only in 2 of the 20 cancer subjects. The calculated sensitivity and specificity for overall gastric cancers were 10.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2-31.7%) and 99.2% (95% CI: 98.8-99.5%), respectively. (18)F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-glucose Positron Emission Tomography was poorly sensitive for detection of gastric cancer in the early stages.

Citing Articles

Limited usefulness of serum carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels for gastrointestinal and whole-body cancer screening.

Sekiguchi M, Matsuda T Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):18202.

PMID: 33097814 PMC: 7585432. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-75319-8.

FDG PET/CT to predict the curability of endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer.

Chung H, Kim J, Sung I, Lee S, Park H, Shim C J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2019; 145(3):759-764.

PMID: 30603905 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-018-02832-9.

Usefulness of esophagogastroduodenoscopy and F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography in detecting synchronous multiple primary cancers with oral cancer.

Ishibashi-Kanno N, Yamagata K, Uchida F, Hasegawa S, Yanagawa T, Bukawa H Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017; 21(4):391-396.

PMID: 28856516 DOI: 10.1007/s10006-017-0644-z.

F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography scan after gastric endoscopy in those who present with non-specific symptoms, is it necessary or not?.

Xu H, Guo R, Xu W, Pan Y, Ma T South Asian J Cancer. 2017; 6(2):59-63.

PMID: 28702407 PMC: 5506810. DOI: 10.4103/2278-330X.208853.

Performance of 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for esophageal cancer screening.

Sekiguchi M, Terauchi T, Kakugawa Y, Shimada N, Saito Y, Matsuda T World J Gastroenterol. 2017; 23(15):2743-2749.

PMID: 28487611 PMC: 5403753. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i15.2743.

References

Geleijns J, Broerse J, Shaw M, Schultz F, Teeuwisse W, van Unnik J . A comparison of patient dose for examinations of the upper gastrointestinal tract at 11 conventional and digital X-ray units in The Netherlands. Br J Radiol. 1998; 71(847):745-53. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.71.847.9771385. View

Cook G, Fogelman I, Maisey M . Normal physiological and benign pathological variants of 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron-emission tomography scanning: potential for error in interpretation. Semin Nucl Med. 1996; 26(4):308-14. DOI: 10.1016/s0001-2998(96)80006-7. View

Rigo P, Paulus P, Kaschten B, Hustinx R, Bury T, Jerusalem G . Oncological applications of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. Eur J Nucl Med. 1996; 23(12):1641-74. DOI: 10.1007/BF01249629. View

Mochiki E, Kuwano H, Katoh H, Asao T, Oriuchi N, Endo K . Evaluation of 18F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography for gastric cancer. World J Surg. 2004; 28(3):247-53. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-003-7191-5. View

Stahl A, Ott K, Weber W, Becker K, Link T, Siewert J . FDG PET imaging of locally advanced gastric carcinomas: correlation with endoscopic and histopathological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 30(2):288-95. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-002-1029-5. View

Chen J, Cheong J, Yun M, Kim J, Lim J, Hyung W . Improvement in preoperative staging of gastric adenocarcinoma with positron emission tomography. Cancer. 2005; 103(11):2383-90. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.21074. View

Koga H, Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Hiraka K, Nakagawa M, Abe K . An analysis of the physiological FDG uptake pattern in the stomach. Ann Nucl Med. 2004; 17(8):733-8. DOI: 10.1007/BF02984984. View

Broadhead D, Chapple C, Faulkner K . The impact of digital imaging on patient doses during barium studies. Br J Radiol. 1995; 68(813):992-6. DOI: 10.1259/0007-1285-68-813-992. View

Kelloff G, Hoffman J, Johnson B, Scher H, Siegel B, Cheng E . Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development. Clin Cancer Res. 2005; 11(8):2785-808. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-2626. View

10.

Yasuda S, Ide M . PET and cancer screening. Ann Nucl Med. 2005; 19(3):167-77. DOI: 10.1007/BF02984601. View

11.

Yun M, Lim J, Noh S, Hyung W, Cheong J, Bong J . Lymph node staging of gastric cancer using (18)F-FDG PET: a comparison study with CT. J Nucl Med. 2005; 46(10):1582-8. View

12.

Gordon B, Flanagan F, Dehdashti F . Whole-body positron emission tomography: normal variations, pitfalls, and technical considerations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997; 169(6):1675-80. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.169.6.9393189. View

13.

Oshida M, Uno K, Suzuki M, Nagashima T, Hashimoto H, Yagata H . Predicting the prognoses of breast carcinoma patients with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-fluoro[18F]-D-glucose. Cancer. 1998; 82(11):2227-34. View

14.

Yeung H, Macapinlac H, Karpeh M, Finn R, Larson S . Accuracy of FDG-PET in Gastric Cancer. Preliminary Experience. Clin Positron Imaging. 2003; 1(4):213-221. DOI: 10.1016/s1095-0397(98)00018-1. View

15.

Japanese Gastric Cancer Association . Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma - 2nd English Edition -. Gastric Cancer. 2002; 1(1):10-24. DOI: 10.1007/s101209800016. View

16.

Hamashima C, Sobue T, Muramatsu Y, Saito H, Moriyama N, Kakizoe T . Comparison of observed and expected numbers of detected cancers in the research center for cancer prevention and screening program. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2006; 36(5):301-8. DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyl022. View

17.

Yoshioka T, Yamaguchi K, Kubota K, Saginoya T, Yamazaki T, Ido T . Evaluation of 18F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer. J Nucl Med. 2003; 44(5):690-9. View

18.

Oku S, Nakagawa K, Momose T, Kumakura Y, Abe A, Watanabe T . FDG-PET after radiotherapy is a good prognostic indicator of rectal cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2002; 16(6):409-16. DOI: 10.1007/BF02990079. View

19.

Mizoue T, Yoshimura T, Tokui N, Hoshiyama Y, Yatsuya H, Sakata K . Prospective study of screening for stomach cancer in Japan. Int J Cancer. 2003; 106(1):103-7. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.11183. View

20.

Bombardieri E, Aktolun C, Baum R, Bishof-Delaloye A, Buscombe J, Chatal J . FDG-PET: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004; 30(12):BP115-24. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-003-1355-2. View