European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2018
Practice-based evidence for the clinical benefit of PET/CT-results of the first oncologic PET/CT registry in Germany.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Pfannenberg Christina, Gueckel Brigitte, Wang Lisa, Gatidis Sergios, Olthof Susann-Cathrin, Vach Werner, Reimold Matthias, la Fougere Christian, Nikolaou Konstantin, Martus Peter
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of PET/CT on clinical management of cancer patients based on a prospective data registry. The study was developed to inform consultations with public health insurances on PET/CT coverage.
METHODS: We evaluated a prospective patient cohort having a clinically indicated PET/CT at a single German University Center from April 2013 to August 2016. The registry collected questionnaire data from requesting physicians on intended patient management before and after PET/CT. A total of 4,504 patients with 5,939 PET/CT examinations were enrolled in the registry, resulting in evaluable data from 3,724 patients receiving 4,754 scans. The impact of PET/CT on patient management was assessed across 22 tumor types, for different indications (diagnosis, staging, suspected recurrence) and different categories of management including treatment (curative or palliative) and non-treatment (watchful waiting, additional imaging, invasive tests).
RESULTS: The most frequent PET/CT indication was tumor staging (59.7%). Melanoma, lung cancer, lymphoma, neuroendocrine tumor and prostate cancer accounted for 70% of cases. Overall, the use of PET/CT resulted in a 37.1% change of clinical management (95% CI, 35.7-38.5), most frequently (30.6%) from an intended non-treatment strategy before PET/CT to active treatment after PET/CT. The frequency of changes ranged from 28.3% for head and neck cancers up to 46.0% for melanomas. The impact of PET/CT was greatest in reducing demands for additional imaging which decreased from 66.1% before PET/CT to 6.1% after PET/CT. Pre-PET/CT planned invasive tests could be avoided in 72.7% of cases. The treatment goal changed after PET/CT in 21.7% of cases, in twice as many cases from curative to palliative therapy than vice versa.
CONCLUSIONS: The data of this large prospective registry confirm that physicians often change their intended management on the basis of PET/CT by initiating treatment and reducing additional imaging as well as invasive tests. This applies to various cancer types and indications.
METHODS: We evaluated a prospective patient cohort having a clinically indicated PET/CT at a single German University Center from April 2013 to August 2016. The registry collected questionnaire data from requesting physicians on intended patient management before and after PET/CT. A total of 4,504 patients with 5,939 PET/CT examinations were enrolled in the registry, resulting in evaluable data from 3,724 patients receiving 4,754 scans. The impact of PET/CT on patient management was assessed across 22 tumor types, for different indications (diagnosis, staging, suspected recurrence) and different categories of management including treatment (curative or palliative) and non-treatment (watchful waiting, additional imaging, invasive tests).
RESULTS: The most frequent PET/CT indication was tumor staging (59.7%). Melanoma, lung cancer, lymphoma, neuroendocrine tumor and prostate cancer accounted for 70% of cases. Overall, the use of PET/CT resulted in a 37.1% change of clinical management (95% CI, 35.7-38.5), most frequently (30.6%) from an intended non-treatment strategy before PET/CT to active treatment after PET/CT. The frequency of changes ranged from 28.3% for head and neck cancers up to 46.0% for melanomas. The impact of PET/CT was greatest in reducing demands for additional imaging which decreased from 66.1% before PET/CT to 6.1% after PET/CT. Pre-PET/CT planned invasive tests could be avoided in 72.7% of cases. The treatment goal changed after PET/CT in 21.7% of cases, in twice as many cases from curative to palliative therapy than vice versa.
CONCLUSIONS: The data of this large prospective registry confirm that physicians often change their intended management on the basis of PET/CT by initiating treatment and reducing additional imaging as well as invasive tests. This applies to various cancer types and indications.