Diagnostic accuracy in NSCLC lymph node staging with Total-Body and conventional PET/CT

IF 8.6 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Pub Date : 2025-03-21 DOI:10.1007/s00259-025-07177-3
Clemens Mingels, Mohammad H. Madani, Fatma Sen, Hande Nalbant, Jonathan W. Riess, Yasser G. Abdelhafez, Ahmadreza Ghasemiesfe, Axel Rominger, Michele Guindani, Ramsey D. Badawi, Benjamin A. Spencer, Lorenzo Nardo
{"title":"Diagnostic accuracy in NSCLC lymph node staging with Total-Body and conventional PET/CT","authors":"Clemens Mingels, Mohammad H. Madani, Fatma Sen, Hande Nalbant, Jonathan W. Riess, Yasser G. Abdelhafez, Ahmadreza Ghasemiesfe, Axel Rominger, Michele Guindani, Ramsey D. Badawi, Benjamin A. Spencer, Lorenzo Nardo","doi":"10.1007/s00259-025-07177-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Introduction</h3><p>Our aim was to characterize the diagnostic accuracy indices for nodal (N)-staging with [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG Total-Body (TB) and short-axial field-of-view (SAFOV) PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients referred for staging or restaging.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>In this prospective single center cross-over head-to-head comparative study 48 patients underwent [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG TB and SAFOV PET/CT on the same day. In total 700 lymph node levels (1R/L, 2R/L, 3a/p, 4R/L, 5, 6, 7, 8R/L, 9R/L, 10-14R/L) of 28 patients could be correlated to a composite reference standard (histopathological correlation, imaging after localized or systemic treatment), which allowed determination of true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN) and false negative (FN) lesions. Lymph nodes were characterized semi-quantitatively by maximum standardized uptake value (SUV<sub>max</sub>), tumor-to-background ratio (TBR), metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) leading to threshold for each scanner.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>TB and SAFOV PET/CT showed high diagnostic accuracy indices for patient-based N-staging. Sensitivity and specificity were 86.0% (CI: 77.0–95.0%) and 98.3% (CI: 97.3–99.3%) for TB; 77.2% (CI: 66.3–88.1%) and 97.4% (CI: 96.1–98.6%) for SAFOV PET. Positive predictive value was higher for TB (81.7%, CI: 71.9–91.5%) compared to SAFOV PET (72.1%, CI: 60.9–83.4%). However, this finding was not statistically significant (<i>p</i> = 0.08). Negative predictive values for TB (98.6%, CI: 97.9–99.6%) and SAFOV PET/CT (98.0%, CI: 96.9–99.1%) were comparable. Overall, NSCLC N-staging was affected in six cases on SAFOV and only in one case on TB PET/CT. Semi-quantitative analysis revealed a threshold of SUV<sub>max</sub> 3.0 to detect TP lesions on both scanners. However, TBR, MTV and TLG thresholds were lower on TB compared to SAFOV PET (TBR: 1.2 vs. 1.7, MTV: 0.5 ml vs. 1.0 ml and TLG: 1.0 ml vs. 3.0 ml).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>TB and SAFOV PET/CT showed high diagnostic accuracy indices for N-staging in NSCLC patients. Sensitivity and PPV on TB PET/CT were slightly higher, compared to SAFOV PET/CT without statistical significance. However, TB PET/CT showed lower rate of incorrect N-staging and lower semi-quantitative thresholds for the detection positive mediastinal lymph nodes. Therefore, TB PET/CT might be advantageous in detecting small and low [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG-avidity mediastinal lymph node metastases in NSCLC patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":11909,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-025-07177-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Our aim was to characterize the diagnostic accuracy indices for nodal (N)-staging with [18F]FDG Total-Body (TB) and short-axial field-of-view (SAFOV) PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients referred for staging or restaging.

Methods

In this prospective single center cross-over head-to-head comparative study 48 patients underwent [18F]FDG TB and SAFOV PET/CT on the same day. In total 700 lymph node levels (1R/L, 2R/L, 3a/p, 4R/L, 5, 6, 7, 8R/L, 9R/L, 10-14R/L) of 28 patients could be correlated to a composite reference standard (histopathological correlation, imaging after localized or systemic treatment), which allowed determination of true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true negative (TN) and false negative (FN) lesions. Lymph nodes were characterized semi-quantitatively by maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), tumor-to-background ratio (TBR), metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) leading to threshold for each scanner.

Results

TB and SAFOV PET/CT showed high diagnostic accuracy indices for patient-based N-staging. Sensitivity and specificity were 86.0% (CI: 77.0–95.0%) and 98.3% (CI: 97.3–99.3%) for TB; 77.2% (CI: 66.3–88.1%) and 97.4% (CI: 96.1–98.6%) for SAFOV PET. Positive predictive value was higher for TB (81.7%, CI: 71.9–91.5%) compared to SAFOV PET (72.1%, CI: 60.9–83.4%). However, this finding was not statistically significant (p = 0.08). Negative predictive values for TB (98.6%, CI: 97.9–99.6%) and SAFOV PET/CT (98.0%, CI: 96.9–99.1%) were comparable. Overall, NSCLC N-staging was affected in six cases on SAFOV and only in one case on TB PET/CT. Semi-quantitative analysis revealed a threshold of SUVmax 3.0 to detect TP lesions on both scanners. However, TBR, MTV and TLG thresholds were lower on TB compared to SAFOV PET (TBR: 1.2 vs. 1.7, MTV: 0.5 ml vs. 1.0 ml and TLG: 1.0 ml vs. 3.0 ml).

Conclusion

TB and SAFOV PET/CT showed high diagnostic accuracy indices for N-staging in NSCLC patients. Sensitivity and PPV on TB PET/CT were slightly higher, compared to SAFOV PET/CT without statistical significance. However, TB PET/CT showed lower rate of incorrect N-staging and lower semi-quantitative thresholds for the detection positive mediastinal lymph nodes. Therefore, TB PET/CT might be advantageous in detecting small and low [18F]FDG-avidity mediastinal lymph node metastases in NSCLC patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.60
自引率
9.90%
发文量
392
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging serves as a platform for the exchange of clinical and scientific information within nuclear medicine and related professions. It welcomes international submissions from professionals involved in the functional, metabolic, and molecular investigation of diseases. The journal's coverage spans physics, dosimetry, radiation biology, radiochemistry, and pharmacy, providing high-quality peer review by experts in the field. Known for highly cited and downloaded articles, it ensures global visibility for research work and is part of the EJNMMI journal family.
期刊最新文献
Relationship between PD-L1 expression and [18F]FAPI versus [18F]FDG uptake on PET/CT in lung cancer New compartment model for hepatic blood flow quantification in humans from 15O-water PET images Diagnostic accuracy in NSCLC lymph node staging with Total-Body and conventional PET/CT Prognostic value of [18F]FDG- and PSMA-PET in patients evaluated for [177Lu]Lu-PSMA therapy of mCRPC Prognostic impact of metabolic tumor volume using the SUV4.0 segmentation threshold in 1,960 lymphoma patients from prospective LYSA trials
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1