Cargando…

Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT

BACKGROUND: Use of FDG-PET/CT for staging and restaging of lymphoma patients is widely incorporated into current practice guidelines. Our aim was to prospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI compared with FDG-FDG-PET/CT using a tri-modality PET/CT-MRI system. MET...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Herrmann, Ken, Queiroz, Marcelo, Huellner, Martin W., de Galiza Barbosa, Felipe, Buck, Andreas, Schaefer, Niklaus, Stolzman, Paul, Veit-Haibach, Patrick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4690292/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26699124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-2009-z
_version_ 1782406987964743680
author Herrmann, Ken
Queiroz, Marcelo
Huellner, Martin W.
de Galiza Barbosa, Felipe
Buck, Andreas
Schaefer, Niklaus
Stolzman, Paul
Veit-Haibach, Patrick
author_facet Herrmann, Ken
Queiroz, Marcelo
Huellner, Martin W.
de Galiza Barbosa, Felipe
Buck, Andreas
Schaefer, Niklaus
Stolzman, Paul
Veit-Haibach, Patrick
author_sort Herrmann, Ken
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Use of FDG-PET/CT for staging and restaging of lymphoma patients is widely incorporated into current practice guidelines. Our aim was to prospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI compared with FDG-FDG-PET/CT using a tri-modality PET/CT-MRI system. METHODS: From 04/12 to 01/14, a total of 82 FDG-PET/CT examinations including an additional scientific MRI on a tri-modality setup were performed in 61 patients. FDG-PET/CT, FDG-PET/MRI, and WB-DW-MRI were independently analyzed. A lesion with a mean ADC below a threshold of 1.2 × 10(−3) mm(2)/s was defined as positive for restricted diffusion. FDG-PET/CT and FDG-PET/MRI were evaluated for the detection of lesions corresponding to lymphoma manifestations according to the German Hodgkin Study Group. Imaging findings were validated by biopsy (n = 21), by follow-up imaging comprising CT, FDG-PET/CT, and/or FDG-PET/MRI (n = 32), or clinically (n = 25) (mean follow-up: 9.1 months). RESULTS: FDG-PET/MRI and FDG-PET/CT accurately detected 188 lesions in 27 patients. Another 54 examinations in 35 patients were negative. WB-DW-MRI detected 524 lesions, of which 125 (66.5 % of the aforementioned 188 lesions) were true positive. Among the 188 lesions positive for lymphoma, FDG-PET/MRI detected all 170 instances of nodal disease and also all 18 extranodal lymphoma manifestations; by comparison, WB-DW-MRI characterized 115 (67.6 %) and 10 (55.6 %) lesions as positive for nodal and extranodal disease, respectively. FDG-PET/MRI was superior to WB-DW-MRI in detecting lymphoma manifestations in patients included for staging (113 vs. 73), for restaging (75 vs. 52), for evaluation of high- (127 vs. 81) and low-grade lymphomas (61 vs. 46), and for definition of Ann Arbor stage (WB-DW-MRI resulted in upstaging in 60 cases, including 45 patients free of disease, and downstaging in 4). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that FDG-PET/CT and FDG-PET/MRI probably have a similar performance in the clinical work-up of lymphomas. The performance of WB-DW-MRI was generally inferior to that of both FDG-PET-based methods but the technique might be used in specific scenarios, e.g., in low-grade lymphomas and during surveillance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4690292
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46902922015-12-25 Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT Herrmann, Ken Queiroz, Marcelo Huellner, Martin W. de Galiza Barbosa, Felipe Buck, Andreas Schaefer, Niklaus Stolzman, Paul Veit-Haibach, Patrick BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: Use of FDG-PET/CT for staging and restaging of lymphoma patients is widely incorporated into current practice guidelines. Our aim was to prospectively evaluate the diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI compared with FDG-FDG-PET/CT using a tri-modality PET/CT-MRI system. METHODS: From 04/12 to 01/14, a total of 82 FDG-PET/CT examinations including an additional scientific MRI on a tri-modality setup were performed in 61 patients. FDG-PET/CT, FDG-PET/MRI, and WB-DW-MRI were independently analyzed. A lesion with a mean ADC below a threshold of 1.2 × 10(−3) mm(2)/s was defined as positive for restricted diffusion. FDG-PET/CT and FDG-PET/MRI were evaluated for the detection of lesions corresponding to lymphoma manifestations according to the German Hodgkin Study Group. Imaging findings were validated by biopsy (n = 21), by follow-up imaging comprising CT, FDG-PET/CT, and/or FDG-PET/MRI (n = 32), or clinically (n = 25) (mean follow-up: 9.1 months). RESULTS: FDG-PET/MRI and FDG-PET/CT accurately detected 188 lesions in 27 patients. Another 54 examinations in 35 patients were negative. WB-DW-MRI detected 524 lesions, of which 125 (66.5 % of the aforementioned 188 lesions) were true positive. Among the 188 lesions positive for lymphoma, FDG-PET/MRI detected all 170 instances of nodal disease and also all 18 extranodal lymphoma manifestations; by comparison, WB-DW-MRI characterized 115 (67.6 %) and 10 (55.6 %) lesions as positive for nodal and extranodal disease, respectively. FDG-PET/MRI was superior to WB-DW-MRI in detecting lymphoma manifestations in patients included for staging (113 vs. 73), for restaging (75 vs. 52), for evaluation of high- (127 vs. 81) and low-grade lymphomas (61 vs. 46), and for definition of Ann Arbor stage (WB-DW-MRI resulted in upstaging in 60 cases, including 45 patients free of disease, and downstaging in 4). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that FDG-PET/CT and FDG-PET/MRI probably have a similar performance in the clinical work-up of lymphomas. The performance of WB-DW-MRI was generally inferior to that of both FDG-PET-based methods but the technique might be used in specific scenarios, e.g., in low-grade lymphomas and during surveillance. BioMed Central 2015-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC4690292/ /pubmed/26699124 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-2009-z Text en © Herrmann et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Herrmann, Ken
Queiroz, Marcelo
Huellner, Martin W.
de Galiza Barbosa, Felipe
Buck, Andreas
Schaefer, Niklaus
Stolzman, Paul
Veit-Haibach, Patrick
Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT
title Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT
title_full Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT
title_fullStr Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT
title_short Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI and WB-DW-MRI in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard FDG-PET/CT
title_sort diagnostic performance of fdg-pet/mri and wb-dw-mri in the evaluation of lymphoma: a prospective comparison to standard fdg-pet/ct
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4690292/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26699124
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-2009-z
work_keys_str_mv AT herrmannken diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct
AT queirozmarcelo diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct
AT huellnermartinw diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct
AT degalizabarbosafelipe diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct
AT buckandreas diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct
AT schaeferniklaus diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct
AT stolzmanpaul diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct
AT veithaibachpatrick diagnosticperformanceoffdgpetmriandwbdwmriintheevaluationoflymphomaaprospectivecomparisontostandardfdgpetct