Annals of nuclear medicine · 2007
The detection rates and tumor clinical/pathological stages of whole-body FDG-PET cancer screening.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ono Ken, Ochiai Reiji, Yoshida Tsuyoshi, Kitagawa Mami, Omagari Junichi, Kobayashi Hisashi, Yamashita Yasuyuki
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: FDG-PET has been used for cancer screening, mainly in East-Asia, and cancers are found not infrequently. However, their stages have not been clarified. We examined the detection rates of various cancers using whole-body PET for the screening of cancers in asymptomatic individuals, focusing on their clinical and pathological stages.
METHODS: Whole-body PET was obtained as a part of our cancer screening program among 3,426 healthy subjects. All subjects participated in a course of PET examination in conjunction with conventional examinations including a medical questionnaire, tumor markers, immunological fecal occult blood test, neck and abdominal ultrasonography and whole body computed tomography. A diagnosis and staging was obtained by an analysis of the pathological findings or by an analysis of the clinical follow-up data.
RESULTS: Malignant tumors were discovered in 65 lesions found in 3,426 participants (1.90%). The PET findings were true-positive in 46 of the 65 cancer cases. The cancers were found in the following organs: the colon 14; thyroid gland 10; stomach 7; lung 5; liver 3; breast 2; and one each in the kidney, gallbladder, esophagus, pancreas and retroperitoneum. The stages were as follows: stage 0 5, stage I 17, stage II 10, stage III 7, and stage IV 6. One was an unknown primary. There were 19 false-negative findings (0.6%) on PET. Six cancers (0.18%) were missed in our screening program.
CONCLUSIONS: PET imaging has the potential to detect a wide variety of cancers at potentially curative stages. Most PET-negative cancers are early stage cancers, and thus can be detected using other conventional examinations such as endoscopy.
METHODS: Whole-body PET was obtained as a part of our cancer screening program among 3,426 healthy subjects. All subjects participated in a course of PET examination in conjunction with conventional examinations including a medical questionnaire, tumor markers, immunological fecal occult blood test, neck and abdominal ultrasonography and whole body computed tomography. A diagnosis and staging was obtained by an analysis of the pathological findings or by an analysis of the clinical follow-up data.
RESULTS: Malignant tumors were discovered in 65 lesions found in 3,426 participants (1.90%). The PET findings were true-positive in 46 of the 65 cancer cases. The cancers were found in the following organs: the colon 14; thyroid gland 10; stomach 7; lung 5; liver 3; breast 2; and one each in the kidney, gallbladder, esophagus, pancreas and retroperitoneum. The stages were as follows: stage 0 5, stage I 17, stage II 10, stage III 7, and stage IV 6. One was an unknown primary. There were 19 false-negative findings (0.6%) on PET. Six cancers (0.18%) were missed in our screening program.
CONCLUSIONS: PET imaging has the potential to detect a wide variety of cancers at potentially curative stages. Most PET-negative cancers are early stage cancers, and thus can be detected using other conventional examinations such as endoscopy.