Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Post-therapy surveillance of patients with uterine cancers: value of integrated FDG PET/CT in the detection of recurrence

  • Original article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to prospectively determine the diagnostic accuracy of PET/CT in the detection of recurrence in patients with treated uterine cancers.

Methods

Twenty-five women, ranging in age from 37 to 79 years (mean 58.9 years), who underwent primary surgical treatment for either a cervical or an endometrial cancer met the inclusion criterion of the study, which was suspicion of recurrence based on results of routine follow-up procedures. PET/CT was performed after administration of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG); two readers interpreted the images in consensus. Histopathological findings or correlation with results of subsequent clinical and imaging follow-up examinations served as the reference standard. Diagnostic accuracy of PET/CT was reported in terms of the proportion of correctly classified patients and lesion sites.

Results

Tumour recurrence was found at histopathological analysis or follow-up examinations after PET/CT in 14 (56%) of the 25 patients. Patient-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of PET/CT for detection of tumour recurrence were 92.9%, 100.0%, 100.0%, 91.7% and 96.0%, respectively. Lesion site-based sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of PET/CT were 94.7%, 99.5%, 94.7%, 99.5% and 99.0%, respectively.

Conclusion

This preliminary study shows that PET/CT may be an accurate method for the evaluation of recurrence in patients who have been treated for uterine cancers and are undergoing follow-up.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rose PG. Endometrial carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1996;335:640–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Waggoner SE. Cervical cancer. Lancet 2003;361:2217–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Benedet JL, Bender H, Jones H, Ngan HY, Pecorelli S. FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2000;70:209–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Disaia PJ, Creasman WT. Clinical gynecologic oncology. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2001; p 89–93.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Eifel PJ, Berek JS, Thigpen JT. Cancer of the cervix, vagina and vulva. In: de Vita VTJ, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA, editors. Cancer. Principles and practice of oncology. 5th ed., Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997; p 1433–78.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Barakat RR, Greven K, Markman M, Thigpen JT. Cancer management. A multi-disciplinary approach. In: Endometrial cancer. 5th ed. New York: PRR Inc; 2001.

  7. Salvesen HB, Akslen LA, Iversen T, Iversen OE. Recurrence of endometrial carcinoma and the value of routine follow-up. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104:1302–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bodurka-Bevers D, Morris M, Eifel PJ, Levenback C, Bevers MW, Lucas KR, et al. Posttherapy surveillance of women with cervical cancer: an outcomes analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2000;78:187–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Olaitan A, Murdoch J, Anderson R, James J, Graham J, Barley V. A critical evaluation of current protocols for the follow-up of women treated for gynecological malignancies: a pilot study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2001;11:349–53.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Maiman M. The clinical application of serum squamous cell carcinoma antigen level monitoring in invasive cervical carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2002;84:4–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kurihara T, Mizunuma H, Obara M, Andoh K, Ibuki Y, Nishimura T. Determination of a normal level of serum CA 125 in postmenopausal women as a tool for preoperative evaluation and postoperative surveillance of endometrial carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1998;69:192–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ebner F, Kressel HY, Mintz MC, Carlson JA, Cohen EK, Schiebler M, et al. Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the female pelvis: differentiation with MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology 1988;166:333–40.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Weber TM, Sostman HD, Spritzer CE, Ballard RL. Cervical carcinoma: determination of recurrent tumor extent versus radiation changes with MR imaging.Radiology 1995;194:135–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hawighorst H, Knapstein PG, Schaeffer U, Knopp MV, Brix G, Hoffmann U, et al. Pelvic lesions in patients with cervical carcinoma: efficacy of pharmacokinetic analysis of dynamic MR images in distinguishing recurrent tumors from benign conditions. AJR 1996;166:401–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Yamashita Y, Harada M, Torashima M, Takahashi M, Miyazaki K, Tanaka N, et al. Dynamic MR imaging of recurrent postoperative cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996;1:167–71.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kinkel K, Ariche M, Tardivon AA, Spatz A, Castaigne D, Lhomme C, et al. Differentiation between recurrent tumor and benign conditions after treatment of gynaecologic pelvic carcinoma: value of dynamic contrast-enhanced subtraction MR imaging. Radiology 1997;204:55–63.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY, Cheung TH, Metreweli C. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR 2000;175:759–68.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Connor JP, Andrews JI, Anderson B, Buller RE. Computed tomography in endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:692–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rohren EM, Turkington TG, Coleman RE. Clinical applications of PET in oncology. Radiology 2004;231:305–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Anzai Y, Carroll WR, Quint DJ, Bradford CR, Minoshima S, Wolf GT, et al. Recurrence of head and neck cancer after surgery or irradiation: prospective comparison of FDG PET and MR imaging diagnoses. Radiology 1996;200:135–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Schelling M, Avril N, Nahrig J, Kuhn W, Romer W, Sattler D, et al. Positron emission tomography using FDG for monitoring primary chemotheapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1689–95.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kalff V, Hicks RJ, Ware RE, Hogg A, Binns D, McKenzie AF. The clinical impact of 18F-FDG PET in patients with suspected or confirmed recurrence of colorectal cancer: a prospective study. J Nucl Med 2002;43:492–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nakamoto Y, Saga T, Ishimori T, Mamede M, Togashi K, Higuchi T, et al. Clinical value of positron emission tomography with FDG for recurrent ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;176:1449–54.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sugawara Y, Eisbruch A, Kosuda S, Recker BE, Kison PV, Wahl R. Evaluation of FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1125–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sun SS, Chen TC, Yen RF, Shen YY, Changlai SP, Kao A. Value of whole body FDG PET in the evaluation of recurrent cervical cancer. Anticancer Res 2001;21:2957–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Belhocine T, De Barsy C, Hustinx R, Willems-Foidart J. Usefulness of FDG PET in the posttherapy surveillance of endometrial carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1132–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ryu SY, Kim MH, Choi SC, Choi CW, Lee KH. Detection of early recurrence with FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 2003;44:347–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Rader J, Zoberi I. Posttherapy FDG PET in carcinoma of the cervix: response and outcome. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2167–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Mutch DG. Post-therapy surveillance monitoring of cervical cancer by FDG PET. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;55:907–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Townsend DW. A combined PET/CT scanner. J Nucl Med 2001;42:533–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, Gaitini D, Frenkel A, Kuten A, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1200–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gutzeit A, Antoch G, Kuhl H, Egelhof T, Fischer M, Hauth E, et al. Unknown primary tumors: detection with dual-modality PET/CT. Initial experience. Radiology 2005;234:227–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Even-Sapir E, Parag Y, Lerman H, Gutman M, Levine C, Rabau M, et al. Detection of recurrence in patients with rectal cancer: PET/CT after abdominoperineal or anterior resection. Radiology 2004;232:815–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, Zangheri B, Aletti G, Garavaglia E, et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histopathologic findings. Radiology 2004;233:433–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ahn C. Statistical methods for the estimation of sensitivity and specificity of site-specific diagnostic test. J Periodontal Res 1997;32:351–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Brown LD, Cai TT, Das Gupta A. Interval estimation for a binomial proportion. Stat Sci 2001;16:101–33.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Saga T, Higashi T, Ishimori T, Mamede M, Nakamoto Y, Mukai T, et al. Clinical value of FDG-PET in the follow-up of postoperative patients with endometrial cancer. Ann Nucl Med 2003;17:197–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chao A, Chang TC, Ng KK, Hsueh S, Huang HJ, Chou HH, et al. FDG PET in the management of endometrial cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:36–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Grisaru D, Almog B, Levine C, Metser U, Fishman A, Lerman H, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET/CT in patients with gynecological malignancies. Gynecol Oncol 2004;94:680–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Belhocine T. 18F-FDG PET imaging in posttherapy monitoring of cervical cancers: from diagnosis to prognosis. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1602–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bristow RE, Del Carmen MG, Pannu HK, Cohade C, Zahurak ML, Fishman EK, et al. Clinically occult recurrent ovarian cancer: patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery using combined PET/CT. Gynecol Oncol 2003;90:519–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Cohade C, Osman M, Nakamoto Y, Marshall LT, Links JM, Fishman EK, et al. Initial experience with oral contrast in PET/ CT: phantom and clinical studies. J Nucl Med 2003;44:412–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Nakamoto Y, Chin BB, Kraitchman DL, Lawler LP, Marshall LT, Wahl RL. Effects of nonionic intravenous contrast agents at PET/CT imaging: phantom and canine studies. Radiology 2003;227:817–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Coleman RE, Delbeke D, Guiberteau MJ, Conti PS, Royal HD, Weinreb JC, et al. Concurrent PET/CT with an integrated imaging system: intersociety dialogue from the joint working group of the American College of Radiology, the Society of Nuclear Medicine, and the Society of Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1225–39.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC, Hany TF. Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions. Radiology 2006;238:405–22.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Sandro Sironi, Claudio Landoni, Stefania Galimberti, Costantino Mangioni, Cristina Messa & Ferruccio Fazio

  2. IBFM-CNR, Institute for Molecular Bioimaging and Physiology, Milan, Italy

    Sandro Sironi, Cristina Messa & Ferruccio Fazio

  3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, H S. Gerardo Monza, Milan, Italy

    Sandro Sironi

  4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Scientific Institute San Raffaele, Via Olgettina, 60, 20132, Milan, Italy

    Maria Picchio, Claudio Landoni, Valentino Bettinardi & Ferruccio Fazio

  5. Department of Clinical Medicine Prevention and Biotechnology, Section of Medical Statistics, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Stefania Galimberti

  6. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, H S. Gerardo Monza, Milan, Italy

    Mauro Signorelli & Costantino Mangioni

  7. Department of Pathology, H S. Gerardo Monza, Milan, Italy

    Patrizia Perego

  8. Department of Nuclear Medicine, H S. Gerardo Monza, Milan, Italy

    Cristina Messa

Authors
  1. Sandro Sironi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Picchio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Claudio Landoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stefania Galimberti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mauro Signorelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Valentino Bettinardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Patrizia Perego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Costantino Mangioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Cristina Messa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Ferruccio Fazio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ferruccio Fazio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sironi, S., Picchio, M., Landoni, C. et al. Post-therapy surveillance of patients with uterine cancers: value of integrated FDG PET/CT in the detection of recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34, 472–479 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-006-0251-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-006-0251-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation