Search

Purpose: To compare CT, MRI, and [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ([18F]-FDG PET/MRI) for nodal status, regarding quantity and location of metastatic locoregional lymph nodes in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Materials and methods: One hundred eighty-two patients (mean age 52.7 ± 11.9 years) were included in this prospective double-center study. Patients underwent dedicated contrast-enhanced chest/abdomen/pelvis computed tomography (CT) and whole-body ([18F]-FDG PET/) magnet resonance imaging (MRI). Thoracal datasets were evaluated separately regarding quantity, lymph node station (axillary levels I–III, supraclavicular, internal mammary chain), and lesion character (benign vs. malign). Histopathology served as reference standard for patient-based analysis. Patient-based and lesion-based analyses were compared by a McNemar test. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were assessed for all three imaging modalities. Results: On a patient-based analysis, PET/MRI correctly detected significantly more nodal positive patients than MRI (p < 0.0001) and CT (p < 0.0001). No statistically significant difference was seen between CT and MRI. PET/MRI detected 193 lesions in 75 patients (41.2%), while MRI detected 123 lesions in 56 patients (30.8%) and CT detected 104 lesions in 50 patients, respectively. Differences were statistically significant on a lesion-based analysis (PET/MRI vs. MRI, p < 0.0001; PET/MRI vs. CT, p < 0.0001; MRI vs. CT, p = 0.015). Subgroup analysis for different lymph node stations showed that PET/MRI detected significantly more lymph node metastases than MRI and CT in each location (axillary levels I–III, supraclavicular, mammary internal chain). MRI was superior to CT only in axillary level I (p = 0.0291). Conclusion: [18F]-FDG PET/MRI outperforms CT or MRI in detecting nodal involvement on a patient-based analysis and on a lesion-based analysis. Furthermore, PET/MRI was superior to CT or MRI in detecting lymph node metastases in all lymph node stations. Of all the tested imaging modalities, PET/MRI showed the highest sensitivity, whereas CT showed the lowest sensitivity, but was most specific. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate and compare the diagnostic potential of whole-body MRI and whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI for N and M staging in newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer. Material and methods: A total of 104 patients (age 53.4 ± 12.5) with newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer were enrolled in this study prospectively. All patients underwent a whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI. MRI and 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets were evaluated separately regarding lesion count, lesion localization, and lesion characterization (malignant/benign) as well as the diagnostic confidence (5-point ordinal scale, 1–5). The N and M stages were assessed according to the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual in MRI datasets alone and in 18F-FDG PET/MRI datasets, respectively. In the majority of lesions histopathology served as the reference standard. The remaining lesions were followed-up by imaging and clinical examination. Separately for nodal-positive and nodal-negative women, a McNemar chi2 test was performed to compare sensitivity and specificity of the N and M stages between 18F-FDG PET/MRI and MRI. Differences in diagnostic confidence scores were assessed by Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results: MRI determined the N stage correctly in 78 of 104 (75%) patients with a sensitivity of 62.3% (95% CI: 0.48–0.75), a specificity of 88.2% (95% CI: 0.76–0.96), a PPV (positive predictive value) of 84.6% % (95% CI: 69.5–0.94), and a NPV (negative predictive value) of 69.2% (95% CI: 0.57–0.8). Corresponding results for 18F-FDG PET/MRI were 87/104 (83.7%), 75.5% (95% CI: 0.62–0.86), 92.2% (0.81–0.98), 90% (0.78–0.97), and 78.3% (0.66–0.88), showing a significantly better sensitivity of 18F-FDG PET/MRI determining malignant lymph nodes (p = 0.008). The M stage was identified correctly in MRI and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in 100 of 104 patients (96.2%). Both modalities correctly staged all 7 patients with distant metastases, leading to false-positive findings in 4 patients in each modality (3.8%). In a lesion-based analysis, 18F-FDG PET/MRI showed a significantly better performance in correctly determining malignant lesions (85.8% vs. 67.1%, difference 18.7% (95% CI: 0.13–0.26), p < 0.0001) and offered a superior diagnostic confidence compared with MRI alone (4.1 ± 0.7 vs. 3.4 ± 0.7, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: 18F-FDG PET/MRI has a better diagnostic accuracy for N staging in primary breast cancer patients and provides a significantly higher diagnostic confidence in lesion characterization than MRI alone. But both modalities bear the risk to overestimate the M stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare the diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT for primary and locoregional lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Methods: In this prospective study, a total of 84 patients (51 men, 33 women, mean age 62.5 ± 9.1 years) with histopathologically confirmed NSCLC underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT followed by 18F-FDG PET/MRI in a single injection protocol. Two readers independently assessed T and N staging in separate sessions according to the seventh edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual for 18F-FDG PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/MRI, respectively. Histopathology as a reference standard was available for N staging in all 84 patients and for T staging in 39 patients. Differences in staging accuracy were assessed by McNemars chi2 test. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) and longitudinal diameters of primary tumors were correlated using Pearson's coefficients.Results: T stage was categorized concordantly in 18F-FDG PET/MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in 38 of 39 (97.4%) patients. Herein, 18F-FDG PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/MRI correctly determined the T stage in 92.3 and 89.7% of patients, respectively. N stage was categorized concordantly in 83 of 84 patients (98.8%). 18F-FDG PET/CT correctly determined the N stage in 78 of 84 patients (92.9%), while 18F-FDG PET/MRI correctly determined the N stage in 77 of 84 patients (91.7%). Differences between 18F-FDG PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in T and N staging accuracy were not statistically significant (p > 0.5, each). Tumor size and SUVmax measurements derived from both imaging modalities exhibited excellent correlation (r = 0.963 and r = 0.901, respectively).Conclusion: 18F-FDG PET/MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT show an equivalently high diagnostic performance for T and N staging in patients suffering from NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of a one-step to a two-step staging algorithm utilizing 18F-FDG PET/MRI in breast cancer patients.Methods: A total of 38 patients (37 females and one male, mean age 57 ± 10 years; range 31-78 years) with newly diagnosed, histopathologically proven breast cancer were prospectively enrolled in this trial. All PET/MRI examinations were assessed for local tumor burden and metastatic spread in two separate reading sessions: (1) One-step algorithm comprising supine whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI, and (2) Two-step algorithm comprising a dedicated prone 18F-FDG breast PET/MRI and supine whole-body 18F-FDG PET/MRI.Results: On a patient based analysis the two-step algorithm correctly identified 37 out of 38 patients with breast carcinoma (97%), while five patients were missed by the one-step 18F-FDG PET/MRI algorithm (33/38; 87% correct identification). On a lesion-based analysis 56 breast cancer lesions were detected in the two-step algorithm and 44 breast cancer lesions could be correctly identified in the one-step 18F-FDG PET/MRI (79%), resulting in statistically significant differences between the two algorithms (p = 0.0015). For axillary lymph node evaluation sensitivity, specificity and accuracy was 93%, 95 and 94%, respectively. Furthermore, distant metastases could be detected in seven patients in both algorithms.Conclusion: The results demonstrate the necessity and superiority of a two-step 18F-FDG PET/MRI algorithm, comprising dedicated prone breast imaging and supine whole-body imaging, when compared to the one-step algorithm for local and whole-body staging in breast cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]