» Articles » PMID: 38411770

Practical Methods to Differentiate Thymic Malignancies by Positron-emission Tomography and Tumor Markers

Overview
Journal Surg Today
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2024 Feb 27
PMID 38411770
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: An accurate diagnosis of thymic malignancies is important, but challenging due to the broad range of differential diagnoses. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of PET/CT and tumor markers for diagnosing thymic malignancies.

Methods: Patients admitted to our department between January 2012 and December 2021 with primary anterior mediastinal tumors were retrospectively evaluated. We evaluated the relationship between the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), tumor markers, and pathological diagnosis in four groups: thymic carcinoma, thymoma, lymphoma, and others.

Results: In total, 139 patients were included in this study. The SUVmax was significantly higher in lymphoma, thymic carcinoma, and thymoma, in that order. The cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1) was significantly higher in thymic carcinoma than in the other groups. An ROC curve analysis indicated that the optimal cut-off values of SUVmax for thymic carcinoma plus lymphoma and CYFRA 21-1 for thymic carcinoma were 7.97 (AUC = 0.934) and 2.95 (AUC = 0.768), respectively. Using a combination of cut-off values (SUVmax = 8, CYFRA 21-1 = 3), the accuracy rate for diagnosing thymic carcinoma was 91.4%.

Conclusions: The SUVmax and CYFRA 21-1 levels are significant indicators for the diagnosis of thymic carcinoma. Combining these indicators resulted in a more accurate diagnosis of thymic malignancies, which could facilitate the decision-making process for determining the optimal treatment strategies.

References
1.
Marx A, Chan J, Chalabreysse L, Dacic S, Detterbeck F, French C . The 2021 WHO Classification of Tumors of the Thymus and Mediastinum: What Is New in Thymic Epithelial, Germ Cell, and Mesenchymal Tumors?. J Thorac Oncol. 2021; 17(2):200-213. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.10.010. View

2.
Carter B, Benveniste M, Madan R, Godoy M, de Groot P, Truong M . IASLC/ITMIG Staging System and Lymph Node Map for Thymic Epithelial Neoplasms. Radiographics. 2017; 37(3):758-776. DOI: 10.1148/rg.2017160096. View

3.
Guerrera F, Falcoz P, Moser B, Van Raemdonck D, Bille A, Toker A . Thymomectomy plus total thymectomy versus simple thymomectomy for early-stage thymoma without myasthenia gravis: a European Society of Thoracic Surgeons Thymic Working Group Study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021; 60(4):881-887. PMC: 10060729. DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab224. View

4.
Litvak A, Woo K, Hayes S, Huang J, Rimner A, Sima C . Clinical characteristics and outcomes for patients with thymic carcinoma: evaluation of Masaoka staging. J Thorac Oncol. 2014; 9(12):1810-5. PMC: 4663074. DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000363. View

5.
Yang C, Hurd J, Shah S, Liou D, Wang H, Backhus L . A national analysis of open versus minimally invasive thymectomy for stage I to III thymoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020; 160(2):555-567.e15. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.11.114. View