1 / 14

18 FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumours

18 FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumours. VS Warbey, RE Ferner, JT Dunn, E Calonje, MJ O’Doherty St Thomas’ Clinical PET Centre and Department of Clinical Neurosciences Guy’s, King’s and St Thomas’ School of Medicine. Introduction.

nile
Télécharger la présentation

18 FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumours

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 18 FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumours VS Warbey, RE Ferner, JT Dunn, E Calonje, MJ O’Doherty St Thomas’ Clinical PET Centre and Department of Clinical Neurosciences Guy’s, King’s and St Thomas’ School of Medicine

  2. Introduction • MPNST in NF1 – a diagnostic challenge • Overlap of clinical manifestations • MRI identifies site and extent, not reliable in detecting malignant change • Histology is the final arbiter of malignancy • Management requires a Specialist MDM approach

  3. Background • Previous work by our group and others has concluded that 18FDG-PET is helpful in determining malignant change in neurofibromas • Significant difference in SUVmax between benign and malignant lesions with delayed imaging at approximately 200 minutes • SUVmax on delayed imaging • < 2.5 • 2.5 - 3.5 • > 3.5 Ferner et al. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000;68:353-357 Bredella et al.AJR 2007;189:928-935 Ferner et al. Ann Oncol 2008; 19(2):390-4

  4. Aims • To evaluate the sensitivity of PET/CT • To clarify the value of early and delayed imaging • To re-validate the current cut-off values for identification of malignant change within neurofibromas using PET/CT • To examine the relationship between SUV and tumour grade

  5. Methods • Patients with symptomatic neurofibromas referred for 18FDG PET/CT were identified from the reports archive • Early and delayed imaging (90 minutes, 4 hours) • SUVmax measured • Classified as malignant: • SUVmax rose to > 3.5 on delayed imaging • Histological correlation

  6. Early Imaging Late Imaging Benign

  7. Malignant (1) Early Imaging Late Imaging

  8. Malignant (2) Early Imaging Late Imaging

  9. Results (1) • 97 studies were identified from the PET/CT reports archive over a 35-month period from August 2004 to April 2008 • Final analysis: 69 studies in 62 patients, 85 neurofibromas • Exclusions: No delayed imaging/no focal uptake, alternative diagnosis, repeat lesion • 31 males, 31 females • Mean age 31 years, age range 9 – 86 • Median imaging times • Early 101 minutes (1 hour 41 minutes) • Late 252 minutes (4 hours 12 minutes)

  10. Results (2) • On the basis of semi-quantitative analysis PET/CT classified: • 43 malignant • 42 benign Sensitivity 0.97 (95% CI 0.81-0.99) Specificity 0.87 (95% CI 0.74-0.95)

  11. Results (3) - SUVmax Comparsion Early vs. delayed imaging ([type irrelevant] F­1,83 = 9.98, p=0.0022) Benign vs. malignant ([time irrelevant] F­1,83 = 56.14, p<<0.0001) Significant interaction effect between time and tumour type (F­1,83 = 14.72, p=0.00017) SUVmax early vs. delayed imaging for tumours classified as malignant on PET/CT (p=0.0005)

  12. Results (4) - Histology vs SUVmax SUVmax between tumour types ([time irrelevant] F2,27 = 7.91, p=0.002) SUVmax early vs. delayed imaging (F1,27= 10.58, p=0.003)

  13. Results (5) - Histology vs SUVmax

  14. Conclusions • Recommend early and delayed PET/CT imaging for accurate lesion characterisation • Continue to recommend a cut-off value SUVmaxD=3.5 • Acceptable to maintain a high sensitivity at expense of false positive studies • First study that has demonstrated a correlation between SUVmax and tumour grade

More Related