Positron emission tomography with selected mediastinoscopy compared to routine mediastinoscopy offers cost and clinical outcome benefits for pre-operative staging of non-small cell lung cancer

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 32, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 1033-1040

  Yap, Kelvin K ^a   Yap, Kenneth S K ^a   Byrne, Amanda J ^a   Berlangieri, Salvatore U ^a   Poon, Aurora ^a   Mitchell, Paul ^a   Knight, Simon R ^a   Clarke, Peter C ^a   Harris, Anthony ^a   Tauro, Andrew ^a   Rowe, Christopher C ^a   Scott, Andrew M ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b AUSTIN HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

18F fluorodeoxyglucose; Cost effectiveness; Mediastinoscopy; NSCLC; Positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ARTICLE; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER STAGING; COMMUNITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; DECISION THEORY; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDIASTINOSCOPY; MEDIASTINUM METASTASIS; PATIENT CARE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREVALENCE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THORACOTOMY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AUSTRALIA; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; LENGTH OF STAY; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MEDIASTINOSCOPY; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ECONOMIC; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 25144448125     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-005-1821-0     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Pieterman RM, van Putten JWG, Meuzelaar JJ, Mooyaart EL, Vaalburg W, Koeter GH, et al. Preoperative staging of non-small cell lung cancer with positron-emission tomography. N Engl J Med 2000;343:254-61.
2. Berlangieri SU, Scott AM, Knight SR, Fitt GJ, Hennessy OF, Tochon-Danguy HJ, et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the non-invasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999;16:1-6.
3. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer; a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:111-8.
4. van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, van den Bergh JH, Schreurs AJ, Stallaert RA, et al. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:1388-92.
5. Gambhir SS, Shepherd JE, Shah BD, Hart E, Hoh CK, Valk PE, et al. Analytical decision model for the cost-effective management of solitary pulmonary nodules. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:2113-25.
6. Keith CJ, Miles KA, Griffiths MR, Wong D, Pitman AG, Hicks RJ. Solitary pulmonary nodules: accuracy and cost-effectiveness of sodium iodide FDG-PET using Australian data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1016-23.
7. Verboom P, van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, van den Bergh JH, Schreurs AJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:1444-9.
8. Viney RC, Boyer MJ, King MT, Kenny PM, Pollicino CA, McLean JM, et al. Randomized controlled trial of the role of positron emission tomography in the management of stage I and II non-small lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2357-62.
9. Toloza EM, Harpole L, McCrory DC. Non-invasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer: a review of the current evidence. Chest 2003;123:137-46S.
10. Toloza EM, Detterbeck F. Invasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer: a review of the current evidence. Chest 2003;123:157-66S.
11. Gambhir SS, Hoh CK, Phelps ME, Madar I, Maddahi J. Decision tree sensitivity analysis for cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in the staging and management of non-small-cell lung carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1996;37:1428-36.
12. Australian Institute of Welfare and Health; Cancer specific data cube. http://www.aihw.gov.au/cancer/datacubes/index.html
13. 18F]-2-fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography scan in potentially resectable non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 2004;125:1413-23.
14. Dietlein M, Weber K, Gandjour A, Moka D, Theissen P, Lauterbach KW, et al. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for the management of potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: priority for a PET-based strategy after nodal-negative CT results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2000;27 11:1598-609.
15. Abe K, Kosuda S, Kusano S. Medical economics of whole-body FDG PET in patients suspected of having non-small cell lung carcinoma-reassessment based on the Revised Japanese National Insurance Reimbursement System. Ann Nucl Med 2003;17(8):649-55.
16. Gugiatti A, Grimaldi A, Rossetti C, Lucignani G, De Marchis D, Borgonovi E, et al. Economic analyses on the use of positron emission tomography for the work-up of solitary pulmonary nodules and for staging patients with non-small-cell-lung-cancer in Italy. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;48(1):49-61.
17. Sloka JS, Hollett PD, Mathews M. Cost-effectiveness of positron emission tomography for non-small cell lung carcinoma in Canada. Med Sci Monit 2004;10(5):73-80.
18. Tshushima Y, Endo K. Analysis models to assess cost effectiveness of the four strategies for the work-up of solitary pulmonary nodules. Med Sci Monit 2004;10(5):65-72.
19. Graeter TP, Hellwig D, Hoffmann K, Ukena D, Kirsch CM, Schafers HJ. Mediastinal lymph node staging in suspected lung cancer: comparison of positron emission tomography with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose and mediastinoscopy. Ann Thorac Surg 2003;75:231-6.
20. Berlangieri SU, Scott AM. Metabolic staging of lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2000;343:290-2.
21. Scott AM. Current status of positron emission tomography in oncology. Int Med J 2001;31:27-36.
22. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kanel EM, Korom S, Seifer B, et al. Staging of non-small cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computer tomography. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2500-7.