Tumor Relapse after Pancreatic Cancer Resection is Detected Earlier by 18-FDG PET than by CT
- 229 Downloads
Pancreatic cancer recurrence is often difficult to detect by conventional imaging. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in the diagnosis of recurrent pancreatic cancer.
One-hundred thirty-eight patients were followed after resection for pancreatic cancer. Sixty-six underwent only CT and were excluded. Seventy-two patients also had FDG-PET. Recurrent patients were divided in two groups: group-1, CT positive and group 2, CT non diagnostic, FDG-PET positive. Characteristics and survival curves of the two groups were compared. Significance was set at p < 0.05.
Overall, tumors recurred in 63 of 72 (87.5%) patients; two patients had a second cancer resected, thanks to FDG-PET. Tumor relapse was detected by CT in 35 patients and by FDG-PET in 61. Prognostic factors were similar in groups 1 and 2. Five out of 35 group 1 patients underwent surgery (two R0, two bypass, and one exploratory). Ten out of 28 group 2 patients underwent surgery (four R0, two R2, two bypass, and two exploratory). FDG-PET influenced treatment strategies in 32 of 72 patients (44.4%). Group 2 patients survived longer (P = 0.09), but the difference was not significant. Disease-free survival was similar in groups 1 and 2.
Tumor relapse is detected earlier by FDG-PET than by CT. FDG-PET can help select the best candidates for surgical exploration, although the real benefit is still to be defined. It influences treatment strategies in a significant percentage of patients. An earlier diagnosis did not influence survival due to the lack of effective therapies.
KeywordsPancreas Pancreatic cancer Tumor relapse PET scan Follow-up
The authors gratefully acknowledge Mario Gruppo for the statistical analysis, Tania Lazzarin for helping with the manuscript, and Simona Callegari for helping with data collection. This study was supported in part by grants from the Italian Ministry for the University, Scientific and Technological Research (MURST), project 2005060715_001.
- 10.Kinsella TJ, Seo Y, Willis J, Stellato TA, Siegel CT, Harpp D, Willson JK, Gibbons J, Sanabria JR, Hardacre JM, Schulak JP. The impact of resection margin status and postoperative Ca19–9 levels on survival and pattern of recurrence after postoperative high-dose radiotherapy with 5-F-U-based concurrent chemotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2008;31:446–453.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Ishigami K, Yoshimitsu K, Irie H, Tajima T, Asayama Y, Hirakawa M, Kakihara D, Shioyama Y, Nishihara Y, Yamaguchi K, Honda H. Significance of mesenteric lymphadenopathy after pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary carcinomas: evaluation with serial MDCT studies. Eur J Radiol 2007;61:491–498.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Pedrazzoli S, Beger HG, Obertop H, Andrén-Sandberg A, Fernández-Cruz L, Henne-Bruns D, Lüttges J, Neoptolemos JP. A surgical and pathological based classification of resective treatment of pancreatic cancer. Summary of an international workshop on surgical procedures in pancreatic cancer. Dig Surg 1999;16:337–345.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 28.Sobin LH, Wittekind C. UICC: TNM classification of malignant tumors. 6th ed. New York: Wiley, 2002.Google Scholar
- 33.Verslype C, Van Cutsem E, Dicato M, Cascinu S, Cunningham D, Diaz-Rubio E, Glimelius B, Haller D, Haustermans K, Heinemann V, Hoff P, Johnston PG, Kerr D, Labianca R, Louvet C, Minsky B, Moore M, Nordlinger B, Pedrazzoli S, Roth A, Rothenberg M, Rougier P, Schmoll HJ, Tabernero J, Tempero M, van de Velde C, Van Laethem JL, Zalcberg J. The management of pancreatic cancer. Current expert opinion and recommendations derived from the 8th World Congress on Gastrointestinal Cancer, Barcelona, 2006. Ann Oncol 2007;18(S7):vii1–vii10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Sobhani I, Tiret E, Lebtahi R, Aparicio T, Itti E, Montravers F, Vaylet C, Rougier P, André T, Gornet JM, Cherqui D, Delbaldo C, Panis Y, Talbot JN, Meignan M, Le Guludec D. Early detection of recurrence by 18FDG-PET in the follow-up of patients with colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 2008;98:875–880.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 37.Casneuf V, Delrue L, Kelles A, Van Damme N, Van Huysse J, Berrevoet F, De Vos M, Duyck P, Peeters M. Is combined 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography superior to positron emission tomography or computed tomography alone for diagnosis, staging and restaging of pancreatic lesions? Acta Gastroenterol Belg 2007;70:331–338.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 38.Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D, Shields AF, Gareen IF, Hanna L, Stine SH, Coleman RE. Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone in expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. J Clin Oncology 2008;26:2155–2161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar