Non-small-cell lung cancer resectability: diagnostic value of PET/MR

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 49-55

  Fraioli, Francesco ^a   Screaton, Nicholas J ^b   Janes, Samuel M ^c   Win, Thida ^d   Menezes, Leon ^a   Kayani, Irfan ^a   Syed, Rizwan ^a   Zaccagna, Fulvio ^e   O’Meara, Celia ^a   Barnes, Anna ^a   Bomanji, Jamshed B ^a   Punwani, Shonit ^a   Groves, Ashley M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS   (United Kingdom)

^b PAPWORTH HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d LISTER HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^e SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Lung cancer; Non small cell lung cancer; PET MR; TNM staging

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; MALE; NON SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PET-MRI SCANNER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TUMOR BIOPSY; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; EVALUATION STUDY; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOLOGY; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; SCINTISCANNING;

ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM STAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84912049711     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: 16197089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-014-2873-9     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Tanaka F, Yanagihara K, Otake Y, Miyahara R, Kawano Y, Nakagawa T, et al. Surgery for non-small cell lung cancer: postoperative survival based on the revised tumor-node-metastasis classification and its time trend. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2000;18:147–55.
2. Sant M, Allemani C, Santaquilani M, Knijn A, Marchesi F, Capocaccia R. EUROCARE-4. Survival of cancer patients diagnosed in 1995-1999. Results and commentary. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:931–91.
3. Schwartz AG, Prysak GM, Bock CH, Cote ML. The molecular epidemiology of lung cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2007;28:507–18.
4. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2500–7.
5. Shim SS, Lee KS, Kim BT, Chung MJ, Lee EJ, Han J, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: prospective comparison of integrated FDG PET/CT and CT alone for preoperative staging. Radiology. 2005;236:1011–9.
6. Kligerman S. The clinical staging of lung cancer through imaging: a radiologist's guide to the revised staging system and rationale for the changes. Radiol Clin North Am. 2014;52:69–83. doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2013.08.007.
7. Kim BT, Lee KS, Shim SS, Choi JY, Kwon OJ, Kim H, et al. Stage T1 non-small cell lung cancer: preoperative mediastinal nodal staging with integrated FDG PET/CT – a prospective study. Radiology. 2006;241:501–9.
8. Antoch G, Stattaus J, Nemat AT, Marnitz S, Beyer T, Kuehl H, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: dual-modality PET/CT in preoperative staging. Radiology. 2003;229:526–33.
9. Siegel MJ, Acharyya S, Hoffer FA, Wyly JB, Friedmann AM, Snyder BS, et al. Whole-body MR imaging for staging of malignant tumors in pediatric patients: results of the American College of Radiology Imaging Network 6660 Trial. Radiology. 2013;266:599–609. doi:10.1148/radiol.12112531.
10. Lauenstein TC, Goehde SC, Herborn CU, Goyen M, Oberhoff C, Debatin JF, et al. Whole-body MR imaging: evaluation of patients for metastases. Radiology. 2004;233:139–48.
11. Schlemmer HP, Schafer J, Pfannenberg C, Radny P, Korchidi S, Müller-Horvat C, et al. Fast whole-body assessment of metastatic disease using a novel magnetic resonance imaging system: initial experiences. Invest Radiol. 2005;40:64–71.
12. Yi CA, Shin KM, Lee KS, Kim BT, Kim H, Kwon OJ, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer staging: efficacy comparison of integrated PET/CT versus 3.0-T whole-body MR imaging. Radiology. 2008;248:632–42.
13. Chandarana H, Heacock L, Rakheja R, DeMello LR, Bonavita J, Block TK, et al. Pulmonary nodules in patients with primary malignancy: comparison of hybrid PET/MR and PET/CT imaging. Radiology. 2013;268:874–81. doi:10.1148/radiol.13130620.
14. Al-Nabhani KZ, Syed R, Michopoulou S, Alkalbani J, Afaq A, Panagiotidis E, et al. Qualitative and quantitative comparison of PET/CT and PET/MR imaging in clinical practice. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:88–94. doi:10.2967/jnumed.113.123547.
15. Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M, Takei T, Fürst S, Maurer T, Gaertner F, et al. Comparison of integrated whole-body [11C]choline PET/MR with PET/CT in patients with prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1486–99. doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2467-y.
16. Pace L, Nicolai E, Luongo A, Aiello M, Catalano OA, Soricelli A, et al. Comparison of whole-body PET/CT and PET/MRI in breast cancer patients: lesion detection and quantitation of 18F-deoxyglucose uptake in lesions and in normal organ tissues. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:289–96. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.11.002.
17. Landis JR, Koch GG. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics. 1977;33:363–74.
18. Catalano OA, Rosen BR, Sahani DV, Hahn PF, Guimaraes AR, Vangel MG, et al. Clinical impact of PET/MR imaging in patients with cancer undergoing same-day PET/CT: initial experience in 134 patients – a hypothesis-generating exploratory study. Radiology. 2013;269:857–69. doi:10.1148/radiol.13131306.
19. Schwenzer NF, Schraml C, Müller M, Brendle C, Sauter A, Spengler W, et al. Pulmonary lesion assessment: comparison of whole-body hybrid MR/PET and PET/CT imaging – pilot study. Radiology. 2012;264:551–8. doi:10.1148/radiol.12111942.
20. Tamura M, Oda M, Matsumoto I, Waseda R, Watanabe G. Pattern and predictors of false positive lymph node involvement on positron emission tomography in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012;60:105–10.
21. Navani N, Spiro SG. PET scanning is important in lung cancer; but it has its limitations. Respirology. 2010;15:1149–51. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1843.2010.01843.x.
22. Vogt FM, Herborn CU, Hunold P, Lauenstein TC, Schröder T, Debatin JF, et al. HASTE MRI versus chest radiography in the detection of pulmonary nodules: comparison with MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:71–8
23. Biederer J, Schoene A, Freitag S, Reuter M, Heller M. Simulated pulmonary nodules implanted in a dedicated porcine chest phantom: sensitivity of MR imaging for detection. Radiology. 2003;227:475–83.
24. Sieren JC, Ohno Y, Koyama H, Sugimura K, McLennan G. Recent technological and application developments in computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for improved pulmonary nodule detection and lung cancer staging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;32:1353–69.
25. Biederer J, Hintze C, Fabel M. MRI of pulmonary nodules: technique and diagnostic value. Cancer Imaging. 2008;8:125–30. doi:10.1102/1470-7330.2008.0018.
26. Ohno Y, Nishio M, Koyama H, Yoshikawa T, Matsumoto S, Takenaka D, et al. Comparison of the utility of whole-body MRI with and without contrast-enhanced Quick 3D and double RF fat suppression techniques, conventional whole-body MRI, PET/CT and conventional examination for assessment of recurrence in NSCLC patients. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:2018–27. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.07.016.
27. Yi CA, Lee KS, Lee HY, Kim S, Kwon OJ, Kim H, et al. Coregistered whole body magnetic resonance imaging-positron emission tomography (MRI-PET) versus PET-computed tomography plus brain MRI in staging resectable lung cancer: comparisons of clinical effectiveness in a randomized trial. Cancer. 2013;119:1784–91. doi:10.1002/cncr.28000.