Pozytonowa tomografia emisyjna – znaczenie w ginekologii

• Authors: Elżbieta Jodłowska , Rafał Czepczyński , Maciej Fularz , Paulina Adamiak , Grażyna Jarząbek-Bielecka , Witold Kędzia , Magdalena Pisarska-Krawczyk , Marek Ruchała

Title variants

EN

Positron emission tomography – role in gynecology

• Languages of publication: PL EN

Abstracts

PL

W pozytonowej tomografii emisyjnej rejestruje się promieniowanie powstające podczas anihilacji pozytonów. Metoda ta jest stosowana w neurologii, kardiologii, onkologii oraz w lokalizowaniu ognisk zapalnych, ma także szczególne znaczenie w ginekologii. W pracy przedstawiono zastosowanie pozytonowej tomografii emisyjnej w diagnozowaniu raka jajnika i gruczołu sutkowego oraz w raku szyjki macicy. Rak piersi jest najczęstszym nowotworem złośliwym wśród kobiet, a nowotwory trzonu macicy, jajnika i szyjki macicy zajmują odpowiednio czwarte, piąte i szóste miejsce według częstości występowania. Wymienione choroby stanowią drugą (rak piersi), czwartą (rak jajnika), siódmą (rak szyjki macicy) i dziesiątą (rak trzonu macicy) przyczynę zgonów z powodu nowotworów złośliwych wśród kobiet. Pozytonowa tomografia emisyjna połączona z tomografią komputerową (PET/CT) z użyciem 18F-fluorodeoksyglukozy, która jest coraz szerzej dostępna, umożliwia ocenę stopnia zaawansowania choroby w  trakcie jednego badania. W  przypadku raka piersi PET/CT z 18F-fluorodeoksyglukozą wykazuje wysoką czułość głównie w raku potrójnie negatywnym i w postaci zapalnej. Pozostałe postacie charakteryzują się niższym metabolizmem glukozy i mogą dawać wyniki fałszywie ujemne. W diagnostyce nawrotu raka piersi PET/CT zapewnia większą dokładność niż inne metody obrazowania. PET/CT cechuje też duża przydatność w ocenie zaawansowania i wznowy raka szyjki macicy, a w szczególności w planowaniu radioterapii. Zarówno w raku szyjki, jak i trzonu macicy badanie wykazuje wysoką czułość w detekcji przerzutowych węzłów chłonnych. Metoda ta jest bardzo skuteczna w ocenie wznowy raka jajnika przy wzroście stężenia markerów nowotworowych. Wyniki badania PET/CT wpływają na decyzje terapeutyczne u znacznej części chorych z rakiem jajnika.

EN

Positron emission tomography records radiation emitted during the annihilation of positrons. This method is applied in neurology, cardiology, oncology and for locating inflammation foci; it also has an important role in gynecology. The paper presents the application of positron emission tomography for the diagnosis of ovarian and breast cancer and in cervical cancer. Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. Endometrial, ovarian and cervical carcinoma are the fourth, fifth and sixth most prevalent cancers, respectively. These diseases are the second (breast cancer), fourth (ovarian cancer), seventh (cervical cancer) and tenth (endometrial cancer) cause of death due to cancer among women. Positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET/CT) using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, which is increasingly widely available, allows for disease staging during one scan. In the case of breast cancer PET/CT with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose is characterized by high sensitivity mainly in triple-negative cancer and in inflammatory cancer. Other forms of breast cancer are characterized by lower glucose metabolism and can give false-negative results. PET/CT ensures higher accuracy in the diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer than other imaging methods. PET/CT is also of high utility for the staging of cervical cancer and detection of its recurrence and, in particular, for radiotherapy planning. The procedure is highly sensitive in the detection of metastatic lymph nodes both in cervical and endometrial cancer. This method is very effective in the assessment of ovarian cancer recurrence with increased tumor marker levels. PET/CT scan results affect therapeutic decisions in a substantial proportion of patients with ovarian cancer.

Keywords

EN

diagnostyka; ginekologia; pozytonowa tomografia emisyjna

Discipline

• MEDICINE: MEDICINE

• Publisher: Medical Communications
• Journal: Current Gynecologic Oncology
• Year: 2017
• Volume: 15
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 268–276

Contributors

author

Elżbieta Jodłowska

• Katedra i Klinika Endokrynologii, Przemiany Materii i Chorób Wewnętrznych, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska

author

Rafał Czepczyński

• Katedra i Klinika Endokrynologii, Przemiany Materii i Chorób Wewnętrznych, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska

author

Maciej Fularz

• Katedra i Klinika Endokrynologii, Przemiany Materii i Chorób Wewnętrznych, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska

author

Paulina Adamiak

• Katedra i Klinika Endokrynologii, Przemiany Materii i Chorób Wewnętrznych, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska

author

Grażyna Jarząbek-Bielecka

• Katedra Perinatologii i Ginekologii, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska

author

Witold Kędzia

• Katedra Perinatologii i Ginekologii, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska

author

Magdalena Pisarska-Krawczyk

• Katedra Zdrowia Matki i Dziecka, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska; Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa w Kaliszu, Kalisz, Polska

author

Marek Ruchała

• Katedra i Klinika Endokrynologii, Przemiany Materii i Chorób Wewnętrznych, Uniwersytet Medyczny w Poznaniu, Poznań, Polska

References

• 1. Carkaci S, Macapinlac HA, Cristofanilli M et al.: Retrospective study of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer: preliminary data. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 231–238.
• 2. Alberini JL, Lerebours F, Wartski M et al.: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) imaging in the staging and prognosis of inflammatory breast cancer. Cancer 2009; 115: 5038–5047.
• 3. Groheux D, Hindie E, Delord M et al.: Prognostic impact of 18FDG-PET-CT findings in clinical stage III and IIB breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012; 104: 1879–1887.
• 4. Riegger C, Herrmann J, Nagarajah J et al.: Whole-body FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for staging primary breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39: 852–863.
• 5. Garami Z, Hascsi Z, Varga J et al.: The value of 18-FDG PET/CT in early-stage breast cancer compared to traditional diagnostic modalities with an emphasis on changes in disease stage designation and treatment plan. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012; 38: 31–37.
• 6. Heusner TA, Kuemmel S, Hahn S et al.: Diagnostic value of fulldose FDG PET/CT for axillary lymph node staging in breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: 1543–1550.
• 7. Hong S, Li J, Wang S: 18FDG PET-CT for diagnosis of distant metastases in breast cancer patients. A meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2013; 22: 139–143.
• 8. Katayama T, Kubota K, Machida Y et al.: Evaluation of sequential FDG-PET/CT for monitoring bone metastasis of breast cancer during therapy: correlation between morphological and metabolic changes with tumor markers. Ann Nucl Med 2012; 26: 426–435.
• 9. Cheng X, Li Y, Liu B et al.: 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET for evaluation of pathological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Acta Radiol 2012; 53: 615–627.
• 10. Mghanga FP, Lan X, Bakari KH et al.: Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography–computed tomography inmonitoring the response of breast cancer to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a meta-analysis. Clin Breast Cancer 2013; 13: 271–279.
• 11. Wang Y, Zhang C, Liu J et al.: Is 18F-FDG PET accurate to predict neoadjuvant therapy response in breast cancer? A metaanalysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 131: 357–369.
• 12. Dirisamer A, Halpern BS, Flöry D et al.: Integrated contrastenhanced diagnostic whole-body PET/CT as a first-line restaging modality in patients with suspected metastatic recurrence of breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2010; 73: 294–299.
• 13. Murakami R, Kumita S, Yoshida T et al.: FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer. Acta Radiol 2012; 53: 12–16.
• 14. Aukema TS, Rutgers EJ, Vogel WV et al.: The role of FDG PET/CT in patients with locoregional breast cancer recurrence: a comparison to conventional imaging techniques. Eur J Surg Oncol 2010; 36: 387–392.
• 15. Champion L, Brain E, Giraudet AL et al.: Breast cancer recurrence diagnosis suspected on tumor marker rising: value of whole-body 18FDG-PET/CT imaging and impact on patient management. Cancer 2011; 117: 1621–1629.
• 16. Van Kruchten M, Glaudemans AW, de Vries EF et al.: PET imaging of estrogen receptors as a diagnostic tool for breast cancer patients presenting with a clinical dilemma. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 182–190.
• 17. Salem A, Salem AF, Al-Ibraheem A et al.: Evidence for the use PET for radiation therapy planning in patients with cervical cancer: a systematic review. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther 2011; 4: 173–181.
• 18. Hansen HV, Loft A, Berthelsen AK et al.: Survival outcomes in patients with cervical cancer after inclusion of PET/CT in staging procedures. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 1833–1839.
• 19. Choi HJ, Ju W, Myung SK et al.: Diagnostic performance of computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: meta-analysis. Cancer Sci 2010; 101: 1471–1479.
• 20. Kang S, Kim SK, Chung DC et al.: Diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET for evaluation of paraaortic nodal metastasis in patients with cervical carcinoma: a metaanalysis. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 360–367.
• 21. Xiao Y, Wei J, Zhang Y et al.: Positron emission tomography alone, positron emission tomography-computed tomography and computed tomography in diagnosing recurrent cervical carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Med Sci 2014; 10: 222–231.
• 22. Ding XP, Feng L, Ma L: Diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer: PET versus PET/CT: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014; 290: 741–747.
• 23. Siva S, Deb S, Young RJ et al.: 18F-FDG PET/CT following chemoradiation of uterine cervix cancer provides powerful prognostic stratification independent of HPV status: a prospective cohort of 105 women with mature survival data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 1825–1832.
• 24. Auguste P, Barton P, Meads C et al.: Evaluating PET-CT in routine surveillance and follow-up after treatment for cervical cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BJOG 2014; 121: 464–476.
• 25. Chang MC, Chen JH, Liang JA et al.: 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 3511–3517.
• 26. Kadkhodayan S, Shahriari S, Treglia G et al.: Accuracy of 18-FFDG PET imaging in the follow up of endometrial cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 128: 397–404.
• 27. Ghooshkhanei H, Treglia G, Sabouri G et al.: Risk stratification and prognosis determination using 18F-FDG PET imaging in endometrial cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 132: 669–676.
• 28. Spaczyński M, Bidziński M, Basta A et al.: Rekomendacje Polskiego Towarzystwa Ginekologicznego dotyczące postępowania w guzach niezłośliwych i raku jajnika. Ginekol Pol 2006; 77: 495–501.
• 29. Nam EJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT et al.: Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI. Gynecol Oncol 2010; 116: 389–394.
• 30. Dauwen H, Van Calster B, Deroose CM et al.: PET/CT in the staging of patients with a pelvic mass suspicious for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 131: 694–700.
• 31. Alessi A, Martinelli F, Padovano B et al.: FDG-PET/CT to predict optimal primary cytoreductive surgery in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: preliminary results. Tumori 2016; 102: 103–107.
• 32. Tanizaki Y, Kobayashi A, Shiro M et al.: Diagnostic value of preoperative SUVmax on FDG-PET/CT for the detection of ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2014; 24: 454–460.
• 33. Tsuboyama T, Tatsumi M, Onishi H et al.: Assessment of combination of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography for evaluation of ovarian masses. Invest Radiol 2014; 49: 524–531.
• 34. Kim SK, Kang KW, Roh JW et al.: Incidental ovarian 18F-FDG accumulation on PET: correlation with the menstrual cycle. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 757–763.
• 35. Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kawahara K et al.: Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182: 227–233.
• 36. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E et al.: Diagnostic accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in staging ovarian cancer: comparison with enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35: 1912–1920.
• 37. Castellucci P, Perrone AM, Picchio M et al.: Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology. Nucl Med Commun 2007; 28: 589–595.
• 38. Signorelli M, Guerra L, Pirovano C et al.: Detection of nodal metastases by 18F-FDG PET/CT in apparent early stage ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 131: 395–399.
• 39. Yuan Y, Gu ZX, Tao XF et al.: Computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 1002–1006.
• 40. Hynninen J, Kemppainen J, Lavonius M et al.: A prospective comparison of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT and contrast-enhanced CT for pretreatment imaging of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 131: 389–394.
• 41. Michielsen K, Vergote I, Op de Beeck K et al.: Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted sequence for staging of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a clinical feasibility study in comparison to CT and FDG-PET/CT. Eur Radiol 2014; 24: 889–901.
• 42. Rubini G, Altini C, Notaristefano A et al.: Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in diagnosing peritoneal carcinomatosis in the restaging of patient with ovarian cancer as compared to contrast enhanced CT and tumor marker Ca-125. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2014; 33: 22–27.
• 43. Schmidt S, Meuli RA, Achtari C et al.: Peritoneal carcinomatosis in primary ovarian cancer staging: comparison between MDCT, MRI, and 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med 2015; 40: 371–377.
• 44. Vargas HA, Burger IA, Goldman DA et al.: Volume-based quantitative FDG PET/CT metrics and their association with optimal debulking and progression-free survival in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer undergoing secondary cytoreductive surgery. Eur Radiol 2015; 25: 3348–3353.
• 45. Liao S, Lan X, Cao G et al.: Prognostic predictive value of total lesion glycolysis from 18F-FDG PET/CT in post-surgical patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2013; 38: 715–720.
• 46. Lee JW, Cho A, Lee JH et al.: The role of metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis on ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in the prognosis of epithelial ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41: 1898–1906.
• 47. Kim CY, Jeong SY, Chong GO et al.: Quantitative metabolic parameters measured on F-18 FDG PET/CT predict survival after relapse in patients with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2015; 136: 498–504.
• 48. Nakamura K, Hongo A, Kodama J et al.: The pretreatment of maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) of the primary tumor is predictor for poor prognosis for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Acta Med Okayama 2012; 66: 53–60.
• 49. Limei Z, Yong C, Yan X et al.: Accuracy of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the diagnosis and restaging for recurrent ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2013; 23: 598–607.
• 50. Gadducci A, Cosio S: Surveillance of patients after initial treatment of ovarian cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2009; 71: 43–52.
• 51. Sari O, Kaya B, Kara PO et al.: The role of FDG-PET/CT in ovarian cancer patients with high tumor markers or suspicious lesion on contrast-enhanced CT in evaluation of recurrence and/or in determination of intraabdominal metastases. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2012; 31: 3–8.
• 52. Thrall MM, DeLoia JA, Gallion H et al.: Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 105: 17–22.
• 53. Palomar A, Nanni C, Castellucci P et al.: Value of FDG PET/CT in patients with treated ovarian cancer and raised CA125 serum levels. Mol Imaging Biol 2012; 14: 123–129.
• 54. Fularz M, Adamiak P, Czepczyński R et al.: Utility of PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer depending on CA 125 serum level. Nuklearmedizin 2015; 54: 158–162.
• 55. Ebina Y, Watari H, Kaneuchi M et al.: Impact of FDG PET in optimizing patient selection for cytoreductive surgery in recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41: 446–451.
• 56. Fulham MJ, Carter J, Baldey A et al.: The impact of PET-CT in suspected recurrent ovarian cancer: a prospective multi-centre study as part of the Australian PET Data Collection Project. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 112: 462–468.

• Document Type: article