Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Assessment of lymph node metastases using 18F-FDG PET in patients with advanced gastric cancer

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

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) with respect to lymph node (LN) metastasis in patients with advanced gastric cancer, and to ascertain the factors that affect this accuracy.

Methods

Seventy-three patients with advanced gastric cancer, verified in all cases by endoscopic biopsy, were enrolled in this prospective study. We conducted FDG PET and other routine preoperative studies, including abdominal computed tomography (CT). Patients underwent either curative-intent gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy (n=67) or exploratory laparotomy. The Japanese system for the classification of gastric cancer was used for LN assessment.

Results

FDG PET was able to detect primary lesions in 70 of the 73 cases. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value of FDG PET for LN metastasis were 40%, 95%, 91% and 56%, respectively. Signet-ring cell carcinoma was associated with the lowest sensitivity (15%), whereas other cell types could be detected with moderate sensitivity (30–71%) and high specificity (93–100%). According to multiple logistic regression, the standardised uptake value for primary tumours was the only independent variable to be significantly related to sensitivity for LN metastasis (p=0.02, odds ratio=1.14). CT was superior to PET in terms of sensitivity (p<0.0001), and PET was superior to CT in terms of specificity (p<0.0001) and PPV (p=0.05).

Conclusion

FDG PET exhibits good specificity for LN staging of gastric cancer, and FDG uptake in the primary tumour is significantly related to the accuracy of FDG PET. Despite some clear limitations, FDG PET proved useful in the LN staging of FDG-avid gastric cancer.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nakamura K, Morisaki T, Sugitani A, Ogawa T, Uchiyama A, Kinukawa N, et al. An early gastric carcinoma treatment strategy based on analysis of lymph node metastasis. Cancer 1999;85:1500-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yokota T, Ishiyama S, SaitoT, Teshima S, Narushima Y, Murata K, et al. Lymph node metastasis as a significant prognostic factor in gastric cancer: a multiple logistic regression analysis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004;39:380–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim HJ, Karpeh MS. Surgical approaches and outcomes in the treatment of gastric cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol 2002;12:162–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fraser I, Nash R, James DC. Computed tomography in gastric cancer. Br J Surg 1985;72:249–50

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Andaker L, Morales O, Hojer H, Backstrand B, Borch K, Larsson J. Evaluation of preoperative computed tomography in gastric malignancy. Surgery 1991;109:132–5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ziegler K, Sanft C, Zimmer T, Zeitz M, Felsenberg D, Stein H, et al. Comparison of computed tomography, endosonography, and intraoperative assessment in TN staging of gastric carcinoma. Gut 1993;34:604–10

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nattermann C, Dancygier H. Endosonography in diagnosis and staging of malignant tumors of the stomach. A prospective comparative study between endosonography, computerized tomography and conventional ultrasonography. Z Gastroenterol 1993;31:719–26

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wakelin SJ, Deans C, Crofts TJ, Allan PL, Plevris JN, Paterson-Brown S. A comparison of computerised tomography, laparoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound in the preoperative staging of oesophago-gastric carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 2002;41:161–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pauwels EK, Sturm EJ, Bombardieri E, Cleton FJ, Stokkel MP. Positron-emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose. Part I. Biochemical uptake mechanism and its implication for clinical studies. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2000;126:549–59

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ak I, Stokkel MP, Pauwels EK. Positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in oncology. Part II. The clinical value in detecting and staging primary tumours. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2000;126:560–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, Silverman DH, Coleman RE, Phelps ME. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med 2001;42(Suppl):1S–93S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kole AC, Plukker JT, Nieweg OE, Vaalburg W. Positron emission tomography for staging oesophageal and gastroesophageal malignancy. Br J Cancer 1998;78:521–27

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mcateer D, Wallis F, Couper G, Norton M, Welch A, Bruce D, et al. Evaluation of 18F-FDG positron emission tomography in gastric and oesophageal carcinoma. Br J Radiol 1999;72:525–9

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lerut T, Flamen P, Ectors N, Van Cutsem E, Peeters M, Hiele M. Histopathologic validation of LN staging with FDG-PET scan in cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction: a prospective study based on primary surgery with extensive lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg 2000;232:743–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Stahl A, Ott K, Weber WA, Becker K, Link T, Siewert JR. FDG PET imaging of locally advanced gastric carcinomas: correlation with endoscopic and histopathological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:288–95

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. De Potter T, Flamen P, Van Cutsem E, Penninckx F, Filez L, Bormans G. Whole-body PET with FDG for the diagnosis of recurrent gastric cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:525–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kim B, Lee J, Yang W, Lee J, Cheon G, Choi C, et al. Findings of F-18 FDG whole body PET in patients with stomach cancer. Korean J Nucl Med 2001;35:301–12

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mochiki E, Kuwano H, Katoh H, Asao T, Oriuchi N, Endo K. Evaluation of 18F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography for gastric cancer. World J Surg 2004;28:247–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yeung HW, Macapinlac H, Karpeh M, Finn RD, Larson SM. Accuracy of FDG-PET in gastric cancer. Preliminary experience. Clin Positron Imaging 1998;1:213–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. von Schulthess GK. Clinical PET and PET/CT Imaging in body oncology. In: von Schulthess GK (ed) Clinical molecular anatomic imaging. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott; 2003, p 249

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kim S, Chung JK, Kim BT, Kim SJ, Jeong JM, Lee DS, et al. Relationship between gastrointestinal F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose accumulation and gastrointestinal symptoms in whole-body PET. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2(5):273–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma–2nd English edition. Gastric Cancer 1998;1:10–24

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hamilton SR, Aaltonen LA. Tumors of the stomach. In: WHO classification of tumors. Pathology and genetics. Tumors of the digestive system. Lyon: IARC Press; 2000:38–52

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fukagawa T, Sasako M, Mann GB, Sano T, Katai H, Maruyama K, et al. Immunohistochemically detected micrometastases of the lymph nodes in patients with gastric carcinoma. Cancer 2001;92:753–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vesselle H, Schmidt RA, Pugsley JM, Li M, Kohlmyer SG, Vallires E, et al. Lung cancer proliferation correlates with [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake by positron emission tomography. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:3837–44

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a grant from the National Cancer Center (0221080). The authors thank Mr. Woo Jae Won, Mr. Young Seok Kim, Mr. Yong Geun Kim and Mr Sang Hyuk Yoon for their excellent technical and generous support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jae-Moon Bae.

Additional information

Seok-Ki Kim and Keon Wook Kang contributed equally to this paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, SK., Kang, K.W., Lee, J.S. et al. Assessment of lymph node metastases using 18F-FDG PET in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33, 148–155 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-1887-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-1887-8

Keywords

Navigation