Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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

Abstract

Purpose

The detection of occult cancer in patients suspected of having a paraneoplastic neurological syndrome (PNS) poses a diagnostic challenge. The aim of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic performance of FDG PET for the detection of occult malignant disease responsible for PNS.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and DARE) was undertaken to identify studies published in any language. The search strategy was structured after addressing clinical questions regarding the validity or usefulness of the test, following the PICO framework. Inclusion criteria were studies involving patients with PNS in whom FDG PET was performed to detect malignancy, and which reported sufficient primary data to allow calculation of diagnostic accuracy parameters. When possible, a meta-analysis was performed to calculate the joint sensitivity, specificity, and detection rate for malignancy (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]), as well as a subgroup analysis based on patient characteristics (antibodies, syndrome).

Results

The comprehensive literature search revealed 700 references. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were ultimately selected. Most of the studies were retrospective (12/16). For the quality assessment, the QUADAS-2 tool was applied to assess the risk of bias. Across 16 studies (793 patients), the joint sensitivity, specificity, and detection rate for malignancy with FDG PET were 0.87 (95% CI: 0.80–0.93), 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83–0.89), and 14.9% (95% CI: 11.5–18.7), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of the summary ROC curve was 0.917. Homogeneity of results was observed for sensitivity but not for specificity. Some of the individual studies showed large 95% CIs as a result of small sample size.

Conclusions

The results of our meta-analysis reveal high diagnostic performance of FDG PET in the detection of malignancy responsible for PNS, not affected by the presence of onconeural antibodies or clinical characteristics.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Graus F, Delattre JY, Antoine JC, Dalmau J, Giometto B, Grisold W, et al. Recommended diagnostic criteria for paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75:1135–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Dalmau J, Rosenfeld MR. Paraneoplastic syndromes of the CNS. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:327–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Sioka C, Fotopoulos A, Kyritsis AP. Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes and the role of PET imaging. Oncology. 2010;78:150–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rees JH, Hain SF, Johnson MR, Hughes RA, Costa DC, Ell PJ, et al. The role of [18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose-PET scanning in the diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurological disorders. Brain. 2001;124:2223–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Patel RR, Subramaniam RM, Mandrekar JN, Hammack JE, Lowe VJ, Jett JR. Occult malignancy in patients with suspected paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes: value of positron emission tomography in diagnosis. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83:917–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Younes-Mhenni S, Janier MF, Cinotti L, Antoine JC, Tronc F, Cottin V, et al. FDG-PET improves tumour detection in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. Brain. 2004;127:2331–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Antoine JC, Cinotti L, Tilikete C, Bouhour F, Camdessanche JP, Confavreux C, et al. 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of cancer in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndrome and anti-Hu antibodies. Ann Neurol. 2000a;48:105–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Linke R, Schroeder M, Helmberger T, Voltz R. Antibody-positive paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes; value of CT and PET for tumour diagnosis. Neurology. 2004;63:282–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Titulaer MJ, Soffietti R, Dalmau J, Gilhus NE, Giometto B, Graus F, et al. Screening for tumours in paraneoplastic syndromes: report of an EFNS task force. Eur J Neurol. 2011;18:19–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. García Vicente AM, Vega Caicedo CH, Mondéjar Solís R, de Ayala Fernández JA, Garrido Robles JA, Pena Pardo FJ, et al. PET/TC con 18F-FDG en la valoración de pacientes con sospecha de síndrome paraneoplásico neurológico. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imag Molec. 2015;34:236–43.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Storstein A, Monstad SE, Haugen M, Mazengia K, Veltman D, Lohndal E, et al. Onconeural antibodies: improved detection and clinical correlations. J Neuroimmunol. 2011;232:166–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hadjivassiliou M, Alder SJ, Van Beek EJ, Hanney MB, Lorenz E, Rao DG, et al. PET scan in clinically suspected paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: a 6-year prospective study in a regional neuroscience unit. Acta Neurol Scand. 2009;119:186–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Schwarzer G, Carpenter JR and Rücker G. Meta-Analysis with R (Use-R!). Springer International. Publishing, Switzerland. 2015. http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319214153.

  15. Berner U, Menzel C, Rinne D, Kriener S, Hamscho N, Döbert N, et al. Paraneoplastic syndromes: detection of malignant tumors using [18F]FDG-PET. Q J Nucl Med. 2003;47:85–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bannas P, Weber C, Derlin T, Lambert J, Leypoldt F, Adam G, et al. 18-F-FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: a retrospective analysis. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:923–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. McKeon A, Apiwattanakul M, Lachance DH, Lennon VA, Mandrekar JN, Boeve BF, et al. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography in paraneoplastic neurologic disorders: systematic analysis and review. Arch Neurol. 2010;67:322–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Matsuhisa A, Toriihara A, Kubota K, Makino T, Mizusawa H, Shibuya H. Utility of F-18 FDG PET/CT in screening for paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:39–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schramm N, Rominger A, Schmidt C, Morelli JN, Schmid-Tannwald C, et al. Detection of underlying malignancy in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1014–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Vaidyanathan S, Pennington C, Ng CY, Poon FW, Han S. 18F-FDG PET-CT in the evaluation of paraneoplastic syndromes: experience at a regional oncology centre. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:872–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Selva-O’Callaghan A, Grau JM, Gamez-Cenzano C, Vidaller-Palacín A, Martínez-Gómez X, Trallero-Araguás E, et al. Conventional cancer screening versus PET/CT in dermatomyositis/polymyositis. Am J Med. 2010;123:558–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Roux V, Olivier P, Taillandier L, Louis S, Sauvee M, Karcher G. Interest of 18FDG PET/CT for etiological investigation of paraneoplastics syndromes. Medecine Nucleaire. 2011;35:641–51.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kristensen SB, Hess S, Petersen H, Høilund-Carlsen PF. Clinical value of FDG-PET/CT in suspected paraneoplastic syndromes: a retrospective analysis of 137 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:2056–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vatankulu B, Yilmaz Aksoy S, Asa S, Sager S, Sayman HB, Halac M, et al. Accuracy of FDG-PET/CT and paraneoplastic antibodies in diagnosing cancer in paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2016;35:17–21.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Albert ML, Darnell RB. Paraneoplastic neurological degenerations: keys to tumour immunity. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:36–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Vedeler CA, Antoine JC, Giometto B, Graus F, Grisold W, Hart IK, et al. Paraneoplastic neurological syndrome Euronetwork. Management of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: report of an EFNS task force. Eur J Neurol. 2006;13:682–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bataller L, Dalmau JO. Paraneoplastic disorders of the central nervous system: update on diagnostic criteria and treatment. Semin Neurol. 2004;24:461–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Consortia

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana María García Vicente.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

No disclaimer

All authors have participated in the writing and revision of this article and take public responsibility for its content.

The present publication is approved by all authors and by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out.

This article is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

García Vicente, A., Delgado-Bolton, R.C., Amo-Salas, M. et al. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of malignancy in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44, 1575–1587 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3722-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3722-4

Keywords

Navigation