Diagnostic value of F-18 FDG PET/CT for local and distant disease relapse surveillance in surgically treated RCC patients: Can it aid in establishing consensus follow up strategy?
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aim of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of FDG PET-CT for the detection of local and distant disease relapse in surgically treated patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective study includes 96 patients underwent FDG PET-CT scanning in the post-surgical follow up within the first 6–12 months referred to nuclear medicine department, to perform PET/CT study. Each patient underwent FDG PET-CT with low dose CT, followed immediately by full dose Ce-CT. Sites of the relapse were categorized into local and distant recurrence. Distant recurrence sites were divided into lymph nodes, lung, bone, and other soft tissue sites. The final diagnosis of disease status was made on subsequent follow up by conventional imaging (CT/MRI), FDG PET-CT, or histopathology whenever possible.
RESULTS: Local and/or distant disease relapse was confirmed in 69 (71.9%) patients and the rest 28.1% were free. Regarding local recurrence FDG PET-CT showed specificity of 100% compared to 98.6% with Ce-CT (p > 0.05) and higher sensitivity noted with Ce-CT (100%) compared to 96% with FDG PET-CT. For global distant sites of metastases Ce-CT revealed high sensitivity and NPV of 93.3% & 96.9% respectively yet lower specificity (93.96%) and PPV (87.5%) was seen with Ce-CT compared to 99.6% and 99.1% with FDG PET-CT respectively. The higher Ce-CT sensitivity was attributed to its ability to detected 100% of cases of lung metastases compared to 80.6% with FDG PET-CT (P-value < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: FDG PET-CT appears to be a very efficient tool in post-surgical surveillance of patients with RCC with notable ability to probe even uncommon sites of distant recurrence.
Keywords: RCCFDG PET-CTpost-surgical surveillancerelapse
References
- Lam JS, Leppert JT, Belldegrun AS, et al. Novel approaches in the therapy of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol. 2005; 23(3): 202–212.
- Arnold IC, Lam JS, Figlin RA, et al. Surveillance Strategies for Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients Following Nephrectomy. Rev Urol. 2006; 8: 1–7.
- Krabbe LM, Bagrodia A, Margulis V, et al. Surgical management of renal cell carcinoma. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2014; 31(1): 27–32.
- Rini BI, Hutson TE, Figlin RA, et al. Sunitinib versus interferon alfa in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(2): 115–124.
- Escudier B, Eisen T, Stadler WM, et al. TARGET Study Group. Sorafenib in advanced clear-cell renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(2): 125–134.
- Reznek RH. CT/MRI in staging renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Imaging. 2004; 4 Spec No A: S25–S32.
- Lam JS, Shvarts O, Leppert JT, et al. Surveillance following radical or partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. Curr Urol Rep. 2005; 6(1): 7–18.
- Aide N, Cappele O, Bottet P, et al. Efficiency of [(18)F]FDG PET in characterising renal cancer and detecting distant metastases: a comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 30(9): 1236–1245.
- Stephenson AJ, Chetner MP, Rourke K, et al. Guidelines for the surveillance of localized renal cell carcinoma based on the patterns of relapse after nephrectomy. J Urol. 2004; 172(1): 58–62.
- Bjelogrlic SK, Radulovic S, Babovic N. Molecular targeting agents in renal cell carcinoma: present strategies and future perspectives. Curr Pharm Des. 2008; 14(11): 1058–1077.
- Escudier B, Porta C, Schmidinger M, et al. ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2014; 25 Suppl 3: iii49–iii56.
- Eggener SE, Yossepowitch O, Pettus JA, et al. Renal cell carcinoma recurrence after nephrectomy for localized disease: predicting survival from time of recurrence. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24(19): 3101–3106.
- Schrodter S, Hakenberg OW, Manseck A, et al. Outcome of surgical treatment of isolated local recurrence after radical nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2002; 167(4): 1630–1633.
- Paparel P, Bigot P, Matillon X, et al. Local recurrence after radical nephrectomy for kidney cancer: management and prediction of outcomes. a multi-institutional study. J Surg Oncol. 2014; 109(2): 126–131.
- Kumar R, Shandal V, Shamim SA, et al. Role of FDG PET-CT in recurrent renal cell carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun. 2010; 31(10): 844–850.
- Bertagna F, Motta F, Bertoli M, et al. Role of F18-FDG-PET/CT in restaging patients affected by renal carcinoma. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur. 2013; 16(1): 3–8.
- Alongi P, Picchio M, Zattoni F, et al. Recurrent renal cell carcinoma: clinical and prognostic value of FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016; 43(3): 464–473.
- Majhail NS, Urbain JL, Albani JM, et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of distant metastases from renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(21): 3995–4000.
- Platzek I, Zastrow S, Deppe PE, et al. Whole-body MRI in follow-up of patients with renal cell carcinoma. Acta Radiol. 2010; 51(5): 581–589.
- Aide N, Cappele O, Bottet P, et al. Efficiency of [(18)F]FDG PET in characterising renal cancer and detecting distant metastases: a comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 30(9): 1236–1245.
- Ljungberg B, Bensalah K, Bex A, et al. Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2015; 67: 913–924.
- Win AZ, Aparici CM. Clinical effectiveness of (18)f-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in management of renal cell carcinoma: a single institution experience. World J Nucl Med. 2015; 14(1): 36–40.
- Antonija B, Jasna M, Marijana J, et al. PET/CT in renal and bladder cancers. Arch Oncol. 2012; 20: 97–102.
- Sharma P, Karunanithi S, Chakraborty PS, et al. 18F-Fluoride PET/CT for detection of bone metastasis in patients with renal cell carcinoma: a pilot study. Nucl Med Commun. 2014; 35(12): 1247–1253.
