Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Role of PET/PET CT in the staging and restaging of thoracic oesophageal cancer and gastro-oesophageal cancer: a literature review

  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Current evidence for the use of FDG PET/PET-CT in staging thoracic oesophageal and GOJ cancer is reviewed.

Methods

PubMed, Medline, Embase (1988–November 2006) and the Cochrane database identifed studies in which FDG PET and PET CT were used for the assessment of thoracic and GOJ cancer.

Results

Conventional assessment remains the mainstay for evaluating the primary site. EUS is used for assessing the primary site, but when EUS is incomplete or not tolerated FDG PET CT is invaluable. The major of advantage of FDG PET CT lies in the ability to detect metastatic disease beyond the celiac axis. There is growing evidence to show that FDG PET CT is useful for assessment of treatment response. FDG PET CT will also detect other occult primary cancers.

Conclusions

The contribution of FDG PET CT to the investigation of patients with primary thoracic oesophageal and GOJ cancer has resulted in improved staging, so providing the ability to optimise treatment.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lerut T, Decker G (1999) Oesophageal cancer Curr Opin Gastroenterol 15:364–369

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Muller JM, Erasmi H, Stelzner M, Zieran U, Pichlman H (1990) Surgical therapy of oesophageal cancer Br J Surg 77:845–857

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Geh JI, Crellin AM, Glynn Jones R (2001) Pre-operative (neo-adjuvant) chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer Br J Surg 88:338–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Blazeby JM, Sanford E, Falk SJ, Alderson D, Donovan JL (2005) Health related quality of life during neoadjuvant treatment and surgery for localised oesophageal carcinoma Cancer 103:1791–1799

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rice TW (2000) Clinical staging of oesophageal cancer CT EUS and PET, Chest Surgery Clin N Am 10:471–485

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Czernin J, Phelps ME (2002) Positron emission tomography scanning: current and future applications Ann Rev Med 53:89–112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. A framework for the development of PET services in England. Department of Health document October 2005 gateway number 5265

  8. Block MI, et al. (1997) Improvement in staging of esophageal cancer with the addition of Positron Emission Tomography, Ann Thorac Surg 64:770–777

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Flamen P, et al. (2000) Utility of positron emission tomography for the staging of patients with potentially operable esophageal carcinoma J Clin Oncol 18:3202–3210

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kato, et al. (2002) Comparison between positron emission tomography and computed tomography in the use of the assessment of esophageal carcinoma Cancer 4:921–928

  11. Kim , et al. (2001) Evaluation of lymph node metastases in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus with positron emission tomography Ann Thorac Surg 71:290–294

  12. Kole AC, et al. (1988) Positron emission tomography for staging of oesophageal and gastroesophageal malignancy Br J Cancer 78: 521–527

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rankin SC, et al. (1988) Computed tomography and positron emission tomography in the pre-operative staging of oesophageal carcinoma Clin Radiol 53: 659–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. McTeer D, et al. (1999) Evaluation of 18 F-FDG positron emission tomography gastric and oesophageal carcinoma BJR 72:525–529

    Google Scholar 

  15. Neto C, Zhuang H, Ghesani N, Alavi A (2001) Detection of Barretts oeophagus superimposed by oesophageal cancer by FDG positron emission tomography Clin Nucl Med 26:1060

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bakheet S, Amin T, Alia A-G, Kuzo R, Powe J (1999) f-18 FDG uptake in benign oesophageal cancer Clin Nucl Med 24:995

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Flanagan FL, et al. (1997) Staging of esophageal cancer with 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography AJR 168:417–424

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Heeren , et al. (2004) Detection of distant metastases in esophageal cancer with 18 F-FDG PET JNM 45:980–987

  19. Lerut T, et al. (2000) Histopathologic validation of lymph node 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 232:743–752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Meltzer CC, et al. (2000) Whole-body FDG positron emission tomographic imaging for staging esophageal cancer: comparison with computed tomography Clin Nucl Med 25:882–887

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lowe VJ, Booya F, Fletcher JG, et al. (2006) Comparision of PET, CT and EUS in the initial staging of patients with oesophageal cancer Mol Imaging Biol 7:422–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Luketich JD, et al. (1999) Evaluation of distant metastases in esophageal cancer: 100 consecutive positron emission tomography scans Ann Thorac Surg 68:1133–1137

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Duong CP, et al. (2006) Significant clinical impact and prognostic stratification provided by FDG PET in the staging of oesophageal cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33:759–769

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Blackstock AW, et al. (2006) A prospective evaluation of the impact of FDG PET staging on survival for patients with locally advanced oesophageal cancer Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64:455–460

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hong D, et al. (2005) Value of baseline PET for predicting overall survival in patient with non-metastatic oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer Cancer 104:1602–1606

    Google Scholar 

  26. Fukunaga T, et al. (1988) Evaluation of esophageal cancers using fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET J Nucl Med 39:1002–1007

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS (2006) Maximum standardized uptake values on positron emission tomography of oesophageal cancer predicts stage, tumour biology and survival Ann Thorac Surg 82:391–395

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rizk N, et al. (2006) Preoperative FDG PET SUV predict survival after oesophageal adenocarcinoma resection Ann Thorac Surg 81:1076–1082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Westreenen M, et al. (2005) Esophageal cancer: CT, endoscopic US and FDG PET for assessment of response to neoadjuvant therapy- systematic review Radiology 236:841–851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Downey RJ, et al. (2003) Whole body 18-FDG PET and the response of oesophageal cancer to induction therapy: results of a prospective study J Clin Oncol 21:428–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Flamen P, et al. (2002) PET for assessment of the response to induction radiochemotherapy in locally advanced oesophageal cancer Ann Oncol 13:361–368

    Google Scholar 

  32. Weber et al. (2001) Prediction of response to pre-operative chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the esophageal junction by metabolic imaging J Clin Oncol 19:3058–3065

  33. Brucher BJDM, et al. (2001) Neoadjuvant therapy of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: response evaluation by PET Ann Surg 233:300–309

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Couper GW, et al. (1998) Detection of response to chemotherapy using PET in patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer Br J Surg 85:1403–1406

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Cefolio RJ, Bryant AS, Ohja B, Bartolucci AA, Eloubeidi MA (2005) The accuracy of EUS with FNA, integrated PET CT and CT in restaging patients with oesophageal cancer after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy J Thorac Cadiovas Surg 129:1232–1241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Melcher L, Wong WL, Sanghera B, et al. (2004) Sequential FDG-PET scanning in the assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in operable esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol 22,14S:4056

    Google Scholar 

  37. Melcher L, Sanghera B, Wong WL, et al (2006) The relationship between FDG PET values histological response and survival in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for potentially operable oesophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol 24:18S

    Google Scholar 

  38. Korst RJ, Kansler AL, Port JL, Lee PC, Kerem Y, Altorki NK (2006) Downstaging of T or N predicts long term survival after pre-operative chemotherapy and radical resection for oesophageal cancer Ann Thorac Surg 82:480–485

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Duong CP, et al. (2006) FDG PET status following chemoradiation provides high management impact and powerful prognostic stratification in oesophageal cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33:770–778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Levine EA, et al. (2006) Predictive value of FDG PET in the identification of responders to chemoradiation therapy for the treatment of locally advanced oesophageal cancer Ann Surg 243:472–478

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Westerterp M, van Westreenen HL, Sloof GW, Plukker J, Th M, van Lanschot JJB (2006) Role of PET in the (re-) staging of oesophageal cancer Scaninavian J Gastroent 41(suppl 243):116–122

    Google Scholar 

  42. van Westreenen et al. (2005) Synchronous primary neoplasms detected on FDG in staging of patients with oesophageal cancers J Nucl Med 46:1321–1325

  43. Assessment(2000) In: Watkinson Gaze MN, Wilson JA, (eds). Stell & Maran’s Head and neck surgery, 4th edn. Butterworth Heinemann publication, Oxford, chap 2, pp 11–28

  44. Wong WL, et al. (1996) Validation and clinical application of computer combined CT and PET with FDG head and neck images Am J Surg 172:628–632

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Lardinosis D, et al. (2003) Integrated PET CT imaging improves staging of NSCLC n Eng J Med

  46. Shim SS, et al. (2005) Non-small cell lung cancer prospective comparision of intergrated FDG PET CT and CT alone for pre-operative staging Radiology 1011:1019

    Google Scholar 

  47. Bar-Shalom R, et al. (2005) The additional valyue of PET/ CT over PET and FDG imaging of oesophageal cancer Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32:918–924

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Rampin L, Rubello D, Nanni C, Fanti S (2005) Value of PET CT fusion imaging in avoiding potential pitfalls in the interpretation of 18-F-FDG accumulation in the distal oesophagus Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32:990–992

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. O’Doherty MJ, Barrington S (2003) PET imaging in HIV infection. In: Valk P, Bailey DL, Townsend DW, Maisey MN, (eds). PET Basic science and clinical practice. Springer, London, chap 43, pp 741–752

  50. Wohrer S, et al. (2006) FDG PET visualizes follicular lymphoma irrespective of grading Ann Oncol 17:780–784

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Hany TF (2003) PET and PET/CT of the liver and pancreas In: Von Schulthess GK, (ed). Clinical molecular imaging. Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, chap 46, pp 334–340

  52. Strauss LG (1996) FDG and false positive results: a major problem in the diagnosis of oncology patients Eur J Nucl Med 23:1309–1414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Cook GJR (2003) Artifacts and normal variants in whole body PET imaging. In Valk P, Bailey DL, Townsend DW, Maisey MN, (eds). PET Basic science and clinical practice. Springer, London, chap 24, pp 495–505

  54. Wong WL, Saunders M (2002) Role of FDG PET in the assessment of indeterminate pulmonary lesions Clin Oncol 14:123–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Van Westreenen HL, et al. (2003) Pitfalls of positive findings in staging oesophageal cancer with FDG PET Ann Surg Oncol 10:1100–1105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Kobori et al. (1999) Positron emission tomography of esophageal carcinoma using 11C-choline and 18 F-fluorodoexyglucose Cancer 86:638–1648

  57. Jager PL, et al. (2001) Carbon-11 choline or FDG-PET for staging of oesophageal cancer? Eur J Nucl Med 28:1845–1849

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Stein HJ, Brucher BLDM, Sendler A, Siewert JR (2001) Oesopahageal cancer: patient evaluation and pre-treatment staging Surg Oncol 10:103–111

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Forshaw MJ, Gossage JA, Mason RC (2005) Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for oesophageal cancer: the need for accurate response prediction and evaluation Surgeon 3:6373–6382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Minsky BD, (2006) Primary combined modality therapy for oesophageal cancer Oncol 20:497–505

    Google Scholar 

  61. Vesselle et al. (2001) FLT PET imaging of non-small cell lung cancer: comparison to Ki67 proliferation index J Nucl Med 42:21

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. PET CT, Paul Strickland Scanner Centre, Mount Vernon hospital, Northwood, HA6 2RN, United Kingdom

    Wai Lup Wong & R. Jane Chambers

Authors
  1. Wai Lup Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Jane Chambers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wai Lup Wong.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wong, W.L., Chambers, R.J. Role of PET/PET CT in the staging and restaging of thoracic oesophageal cancer and gastro-oesophageal cancer: a literature review. Abdom Imaging 33, 183–190 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-007-9241-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-007-9241-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation