Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of various malignant neoplasms detected by FDG-PET cancer screening program: based on a Japanese Nationwide Survey

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The most distinctive feature of FDG-PET cancer screening program is the ability to find various kinds of malignant neoplasms in a single test. The aim of this survey is to clarify the range and frequency of various malignant neoplasms detected by FDG-PET cancer screening performed in Japan.

Methods

“FDG-PET cancer screening” was defined as FDG-PET or positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) scan with or without other tests performed for cancer screening of healthy subjects. This survey was based on a questionnaire regarding FDG-PET cancer screening. We analyzed the situation of 9 less frequently found malignant neoplasms including malignant lymphoma, malignancy of head and neck, esophagus, hepatobiliary and gallbladder, pancreas, kidney, cervical and uterine, ovary, and bladder.

Results

The detailed information of subjects with the suspected 9 kinds of malignant neoplasms mentioned above in the FDG-PET cancer screening program was studied in a total of 1,219 cases from 212 facilities. A statistical significance between PET/CT and PET was found in relative sensitivity and PPV for renal cell cancer. Malignant lymphoma was frequently of indolent type, suspected head and neck cancers had many false-positive results, and pancreatic cancer detected in this program was often in the advanced stage even in asymptomatic subjects. The recommendation of combined screening modality to PET or PET/CT was as follows: gastric endoscopy for assessing early esophageal cancer; abdominal ultrasound for screening hepatobiliary and gallbladder cancer; pelvic magnetic resonance imaging for assessing gynecological and pelvic cancers; and the CA125 blood test for screening ovarian cancer. Delayed image was helpful depending on the type of suspected malignant neoplasm.

Conclusion

We analyzed various types of malignant neoplasms detected by the FDG-PET cancer screening program and presented recommended combination of examinations to cover FDG-PET and PET/CT.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yeung HW, Schöder H, Smith A, Gonen M, Larson SM. Clinical value of combined positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in the interpretation of 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-d-glucose-positron emission tomography studies in cancer patients. Mol Imaging Biol. 2005;7:229–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ide M. Cancer screening with FDG-PET. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;50:23–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Minamimoto R, Senda M, Uno K, Jinnouchi S, Iinuma T, Ito K, et al. Performance profile of FDG-PET and PET/CT for cancer screening on the basis of a Japanese Nationwide Survey. Ann Nucl Med. 2007;21:481–98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. The guideline of FDG-PET cancer screening. Kaku Igaku. 2004; 41:1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  5. The guideline of FDG-PET cancer screening 2007. Kaku Igaku. 2007; 44:1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kojima S, Zhou B, Teramukai S, Hara A, Kosaka N, Matsuo Y, et al. Cancer screening of healthy volunteers using whole-body 18F-FDG-PET scans: the Nishidai clinic study. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43:1842–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nishizawa S, Kojima S, Teramukai S, Inubushi M, Kodama H, Maeda Y, et al. Prospective evaluation of whole-body cancer screening with multiple modalities including [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in a healthy population: a preliminary report. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1767–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. The Foundation of Cancer Research (FPCR). Cancer Statistics in Japan, 2009.

  9. Schöder H, Gönen M. Screening for cancer with PET and PET/CT: potential and limitations. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(Suppl 1):4S–18S.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Schöder H, Noy A, Gönen M, Weng L, Green D, Erdi YE, et al. Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4643–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fueger BJ, Yeom K, Czernin J, Sayre JW, Phelps ME, Allen-Auerbach MS. Comparison of CT, PET, and PET/CT for staging of patients with indolent non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009;11:269–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wahl RL. Principles and practice of PET and PET/CT. 2nd ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 221–39.

  13. Flamen P, Lerut A, Van Cutsem E, De Wever W, Peeters M, Stroobants S, et al. Utility of positron emission tomography for the staging of patients with potentially operable esophageal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:3202–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ott K, Weber WA, Fink U, Helmberger H, Becker K, Stein HJ, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in adenocarcinomas of the distal esophagus and cardia. World J Surg. 2003;27:1035–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Weber G, Morris HP. Comparative biochemistry of hepatomas. III. Carbohydrate enzymes in liver tumors of different growth rates. Cancer Res. 1963;23:987–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. De Santis M, Romagnoli R, Cristani A, Cioni G, Casolo A, Vici FF, et al. MRI of small hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison with US, CT, DSA, and Lipiodol-CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1992;16:189–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Yoon SK. Recent advances in tumor markers of human hepatocellular carcinoma. Intervirology. 2008;51(Suppl 1):34–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Stefaniuk P, Cianciara J, Wiercinska-Drapalo A. Present and future possibilities for early diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16:418–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nomura F, Ohnishi K, Tanabe Y. Clinical features and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma with reference to serum alpha-fetoprotein levels. Analysis of 606 patients. Cancer. 1989;64:1700–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Trevisani F, D’Intino PE, Morselli-Labate AM, Mazzella G, Accogli E, Caraceni PJ, et al. Serum alpha-fetoprotein for diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic liver disease: influence of HBsAg and anti-HCV status. J Hepatol. 2001;34:570–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Beger HG, Rau B, Gansauge F, Poch B, Link KH. Treatment of pancreatic cancer: challenge of the facts. World J Surg. 2003;27:1075–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rose DM, Delbeke D, Beauchamp RD, Chapman WC, Sandler MP, Sharp KW, et al. 18Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the management of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg. 1999;229:729–37 (discussion).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Delbeke D, Rose DM, Chapman WC, Pinson CW, Wright JK, Beauchamp RD, et al. Optimal interpretation of FDG PET in the diagnosis, staging and management of pancreatic carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1784–91.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wahl RL. Principles and practice of PET and PET/CT. 2nd ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 331–47.

  25. Steinberg WM, Gelfand R, Anderson KK, Glenn J, Kurtzman SH, Sindelar WF, et al. Comparison of the sensitivity and specificity of the CA19–9 and carcinoembryonic antigen assays in detecting cancer of the pancreas. Gastroenterology. 1986;90:343–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Homma T, Tsuchiya R. The study of the mass screening of persons without symptoms and of the screening of outpatients with gastrointestinal complaints or icterus for pancreatic cancer in Japan, using CA19-9 and elastase-1 or ultrasonography. Int J Pancreatol. 1991;9:119–24.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Montravers F, Grahek D, Kerrou K, Younsi N, Doublet JD, Gattegno B, et al. Evaluation of FDG uptake by renal malignancies (primary tumor or metastases) using a coincidence detection gamma camera. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:78–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kopka L, Fischer U, Zoeller G, Schmidt C, Ringert RH, Grabbe E. Dual-phase helical CT of the kidney: value of the corticomedullary and nephrographic phase for evaluation of renal lesions and preoperative staging of renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1573–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wahl RL. Principles and practice of PET and PET/CT. 2nd ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 348–54.

  30. Chao A, Chang TC, Ng KK, Hsueh S, Huang HJ, Chou HH, et al. 18F-FDG PET in the management of endometrial cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:36–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Nishizawa S, Inubushi M, Kido A, Miyagawa M, Inoue T, Shinohara K, et al. Incidence and characteristics of uterine leiomyomas with FDG uptake. Ann Nucl Med. 2008;22:803–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Kaji Y, Sugimura K. Standardized uptake values of uterine leiomyoma with 18F-FDG PET/CT: variation with age, size, degeneration, and contrast enhancement on MRI. Ann Nucl Med. 2008;22:505–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lerman H, Metser U, Grisaru D, Fishman A, Lievshitz G, Even-Sapir E. Normal and abnormal 18F-FDG endometrial and ovarian uptake in pre- and postmenopausal patients: assessment by PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:266–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Einhorn N, Sjövall K, Knapp RC, Hall P, Scully RE, Bast RC Jr, et al. Prospective evaluation of serum CA 125 levels for early detection of ovarian cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;80:14–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Risum S, Høgdall C, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Høgdall E, Nedergaard L, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer–a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;105:145–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Hiatt RA, Ordoñez JD. Dipstick urinalysis screening, asymptomatic microhematuria, and subsequent urological cancers in a population-based sample. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1994;3:439–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kubota K, Itoh M, Ozaki K, Ono S, Tashiro M, Yamaguchi K, et al. Advantage of delayed whole-body FDG-PET imaging for tumour detection. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:696–703.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by management expenses grants from the government to the national cancer center No.21-5-2. The authors thank the Japan Radioisotope Association Division of Medical and Pharmaceutical Drugs.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, 1-21-1 Toyama, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo, 162-8655, Japan

    Ryogo Minamimoto

  2. Division of Molecular Imaging, Institute of Biomedical Research and Innovation, Kobe, Japan

    Michio Senda

  3. Screening Technology and Development Division, Research Center for Cancer Prevention and Screening, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan

    Takashi Terauchi & Takeshi Murano

  4. Atsuchi Memorial Institute of Radiology, Atsuchi Memorial Clinic PET Center, Kagoshima, Japan

    Seishi Jinnouchi

  5. Department of Radiology, Yokohama City University, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan

    Tomio Inoue

  6. National Institute of Radiological Sciences, Chiba, Japan

    Takeshi Iinuma

  7. Department of Cancer Screening, National Hospital Organization Shikoku Cancer Center, Ehime, Japan

    Takeshi Inoue

  8. Department of Clinical and Experimental Neuroimaging, Center for Development of Advanced Medicine for Dementia, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Obu, Japan

    Kengo Ito

  9. Department of Radiology, Nagoya PET Imaging Center, Nagoya, Japan

    Hiroshi Iwata

  10. Nishidai Clinic Diagnostic Imaging Center, Tokyo, Japan

    Kimiichi Uno

  11. Research Center for Advanced Information Science and Technology, The University of Aizu, Aizu, Japan

    Shinya Oku

  12. Positron Imaging Center, Aizawa Hospital, Matsumoto, Japan

    Kazuhiro Oguchi

  13. Teishinkai Central CI Clinic, Sapporo, Japan

    Eriko Tsukamoto

  14. Japanese Red Cross Kumamoto Health Care Center, Kumamoto, Japan

    Rumi Nakashima

  15. Hamamatsu Medical Imaging Center, Hamamatsu Medical Photonics Foundation, Hamamatsu, Japan

    Sadahiko Nishizawa

  16. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Radiology, Institute of Development, Aging and Cancer, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan

    Hiroshi Fukuda

  17. Koga Hospital 21, PET Imaging Center, Kurume, Japan

    Tsuyoshi Yoshida

Authors
  1. Ryogo Minamimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michio Senda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Takashi Terauchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Seishi Jinnouchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tomio Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Takeshi Iinuma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Takeshi Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Kengo Ito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Hiroshi Iwata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kimiichi Uno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Shinya Oku
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Kazuhiro Oguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Eriko Tsukamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Rumi Nakashima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Sadahiko Nishizawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Hiroshi Fukuda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Takeshi Murano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Tsuyoshi Yoshida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryogo Minamimoto.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Minamimoto, R., Senda, M., Terauchi, T. et al. Analysis of various malignant neoplasms detected by FDG-PET cancer screening program: based on a Japanese Nationwide Survey. Ann Nucl Med 25, 45–54 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-010-0428-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-010-0428-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation