Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of the impact of addition of PET to CT and MR scanning in the staging of patients with head and neck carcinomas

  • Head and Neck
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology and Head & Neck Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The addition of whole body positron emission tomography (PET) to the investigation of patients with newly diagnosed head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) was assessed over a 6-month period. Staging investigations included laryngoscopy, oesophagoscopy, CXR, CT and MRI. In addition, all patients had an extended-field (whole body) FDG-PET scan and were restaged. Standardised Uptake Values (SUV) were used to measure FDG uptake. SUV levels above 5 were considered indicative of the presence of tumour, values below 3 indicative of benign aetiology and values equal to and between 3 and 5 were considered equivocal. Forty-eight consecutive patients with biopsy proven HNSCC were included for study. Three patients presenting with neck disease had unknown primary tumours. Of the remaining 45 patients, CT scan correctly identified 40 of the primary tumours (89%). MRI and PET both identified 41 primary tumours (91%). Thirty-two patients underwent neck dissection. Of these patients 12 had pathologically N0 necks and 20 had positive nodal disease. CT scan and MRI each correctly staged pN0 necks in 10 of 12 patients (83%) whereas PET alone had a lower true negative rate of 8 out of 12 patients (67%). PET correctly staged the N+ necks in 14/20 patients (70%) versus 12/20 (60%) for MRI, and 8/20 (40%) for CT alone. All four patients who were judged to have distant metastases by PET had these metastases deemed negative by other investigation. None of the three imaging modalities was able to identify the tumour site in the three patients with unknown primaries. In conclusion, although PET has got a higher sensitivity in detecting nodal disease, it has only slightly improved the classification of N+ necks. The findings of this study cast doubt on the merit of routine addition of PET to the current investigative protocols for HNSCC patients.

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. Aassar OS, Fischbein NJ, Caputo GR, Kaplan MJ, Price DC, Singer MI, Dillon WP, Hawkins RA (1999) Metastatic head and neck cancer: role and usefulness ofFDG PET in locating occult primary tumours. Radiology 210:177–181

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Akogula E, Dutipek M, Bekis R, Degirmenci B, Ada E, Guneri A (2005) Assessment of cervical lymph node metastasis with different imaging methods in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. J Otolaryngol 34:384–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Allal AS, Slosman DO, Kebdani T, Allaoua M, Lehmann W, Dulguerov P (2003) Prediction of outcome in head-and-neck cancer patients using the standardized uptake value of 2-[18f]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose. Int J Radiat Onco Biol Phys 59:1295–1300

    Google Scholar 

  4. Altman DG, Bland JM (1994) Diagnostic tests 3: receiver operating characteristic plots. BMJ 309:188–189

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Atula TS, Grenman R, Varpula MJ, Kurki TJI, Klemi PJ (1996) Palpation, ultrasound, and ultrasound- guided fine-needle aspiration cytology in the assessment of cervical lymph node status in head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck 18:545–551

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bailet JW, Abemayer E, Jabour BA, Hawkins RA, Ho C, Ward PH (1992) Positron emission tomography: A new precise imaging modality for detection of primary head and neck tumours and assessment of cervical adenopathy. Laryngoscope 102:281–288

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bailet JW, Sercarz JA, Abemayer E, Anzai Y, Lufkin RB, Hoh CK (1995) The use of positron emission tomography for early detection of recurrent head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in postradiotherapy patients. Laryngoscope 105:135–139

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Braams W, Pruim J, Freling NM, Nikkels PJ, Roodenburg JN, Boering G, Vaalburg N, Vermey A (1995) Detection of lymph node metastases of squamous cell cancer of head and neck with FDG-PET and MRI. J Nucl Med 36:211–216

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Branstetter BF, Blodget TM, Zimmer LA, Snyderman CH, Johnson JT, Raman S, Meltzer CC (2005) Head and neck malignancy: is PET/CT more accurate than PET or CT alone? Radiology 235:580–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fogarty BG, Peters LJ, Stewart J, Scott C, Rischin D, Hicks RJ (2003) The usefulness of fluorine 18-labelled deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the investigation of patients with cervical lymphadenopathy from an unknown primary tumour. Head Neck 25:138–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jabour BA, Choi Y, Hoh CK, Rege SD, Soong JC, Lufkin RB, Hanafee WN, Maddahi J, Chaiken L, Bailet J (1993) Extracranial head and neck PET imaging with 2-(F-18)Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose and MR imaging correlation. Radiology 186:27–35

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Jones AS, Roland NJ, Field JK, Philips DE (1994) The level of cervical lymph node metastases; their prognostic relevance and relationship with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma primary sites. Clin Otolaryngol 19:63–69

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jungehülsing M, Scheidhauer K, Damm M, Pietrzyk U, Eckel H, Schicha H, Stennert E (2000) 2[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is a sensitive tool for the detection of occult primary cancer (carcinoma of unknown primary syndrome) with head and neck lymph node manifestation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 123:294–301

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Keyes JW Jr, Watson NE Jr, Williams DW 3rd, Greven KM, McGuirt WF (1997) FDG PET in head and neck cancer. Am J Roentgenol 169:1663–1669

    Google Scholar 

  15. Keyes JW Jr, Chen MYM, Watson NE Jr, Greven KM, McGuirt WF, Williams DW (2000) FDG PET evaluation of head and neck cancer: Value of imaging the thorax. Head Neck 22:105–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Koshy M, Paulino AC, Howell R, Schuster D, Halkar R, Davis LW (2005) F-18 FDG PET-CT fusion in radiotherapy treatment planning for head and neck cancer. Head Neck 27:494–502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Laubenbacher C, Saumweber D, Wagner-Manslau C, Kau RJ, Herz M, Avirl N, Ziegler S, Kruschke C, Arnold W, Schwaiger M (1995) Comparison of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET, MRI and endoscopy for staging head and neck squamous-cell carcinomas. J Nucl Med 36:1747–1757

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. McGuirt WF, Williams DW, Keyes JW, Greven KM, Watson NE, Geisinger KR, Cappellari JO (1995) A comparative diagnostic study of head and neck nodal metastases using positron emission tomography. Laryngoscope 105:373–375

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Mendenhall WM, Mancuso AA, Parsons JT, Stringer SP, Cassissi NJ (1998) Diagnostic evaluation of squamous cell carcinoma metastatic to cervical lymph nodes from an unknown head and neck primary site. Head Neck 20:739–744

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Sarvanan K, Bapuraj JR, Sharma SC, Radotra BD, Khandelwal N, Suri S (2002) Computed tomography and ultrasonographic evaluation of metastatic cervical lymph nodes with surgicoclinicopathologic correlation. JLO 116:194–199

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Schmidt M, Schmalenbach M, Jungehulsing M, Theissen P, Dietlein M, Schroder U, Eschner W, Stennert E, Schicha H (2004) 18F-FDG PET for detecting recurrent head and neck cancer, local lymph node involvement and distant metastases. Comparison of qualitative visual and semiquantitative analysis. Nuklearmedizin 43:91–101 and quiz 102–104

    Google Scholar 

  22. Schoder H, Yeung HW, Gonen M, Kraus D, Larson SM (2004) Head and neck cancer: clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology 231:65–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schwartz DL, Rajendran J, Yueh B, Coltera M, Anzai Y, Krohn K, Eary J (2003) Staging of head and neck squamous cell cancer with extended-field FDG-PET. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 129:1173–1178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sobin LH, Wittekind CH (2002) International Union against Cancer (UICC): TNM Classification of malignant tumours., 6th edn. Wiley-Liss, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. Stoeckli SJ, Steinert H, Pfaltz M, Schmid S (2002) Is there a role for positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in the initial staging of nodal negative oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck 24:345–349

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stokkel MP, Terhaard CH, Hordijk GJ, Van Rijk PP (1999) The detection of unknown primary tumours in patients with cervical metastases by dual head positron emission tomography. Oral Oncol 35:390–394

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sundaram SK, Freedman NM, Carrasquillo JA, Carson JM, Whatley M, Libutti SK, Sellers D, Bacharach SL (2004) Simplified kinetic analysis of tumour 18F-FDG uptake: adynamic approach. J Nucl Med 45:328–333

    Google Scholar 

  28. van den Brekel MWM, Castelijns JA, Stel HV, Golding RP, Meyer CJL, Snow GB (1993) Modern imaging techniques and ultrasound-guided aspiration cytology for the assessment of neck node metastasis : a prospective comparative study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 250:11–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wax MK, Myers LL, Gabalski EC, Husain S, Gona JM, Nabi H (2002) Positron emission tomography in the evaluation of synchronous lung lesions in patients with untreated head and neck cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 128:703–707

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, St James’s Hospital, Dublin 8, Ireland

    Maky A. Hafidh, Peter D. Lacy, Joe P. Hughes & Conrad V. Timon

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Blackrock Clinic, Dublin, Ireland

    George Duffy

Authors
  1. Maky A. Hafidh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter D. Lacy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joe P. Hughes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. George Duffy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Conrad V. Timon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maky A. Hafidh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hafidh, M.A., Lacy, P.D., Hughes, J.P. et al. Evaluation of the impact of addition of PET to CT and MR scanning in the staging of patients with head and neck carcinomas. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 263, 853–859 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-006-0067-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-006-0067-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation