4.6 Article

FDG PET/CT and Mediastinal Nodal Metastasis Detection in Stage T1 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Prognostic Implications

Journal

KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue 6, Pages 481-489

Publisher

KOREAN RADIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2008.9.6.481

Keywords

Lung neoplasms; Lung neoplasms, CT; Lung neoplasms, PET; Lung neoplasms, staging

Funding

  1. MOST/KOSEF [R11-2002-103]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: We aimed to compare the prognoses of patients with pathologically true negative (P-TN) N2 and PET/CT false negative (FN) results in stage T1 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials and Methods: Our institutional review board approved this retrospective study with a waiver of informed consent. The study included 184 patients (124 men and 60 women; mean age, 59 years) with stage T1 NSCLC who underwent an integrated PET/CT and surgery. After estimating the efficacy of PET/CT for detecting N2 disease, we determined and compared disease-free survival (DFS) rates in three groups (P-TN [n = 161], PET/CT FN [n = 12], and PET/CT true positive [TP, n = 11]) using the Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank test. Results: Pathologic N2 disease was observed in 23 (12%) patients. PET/CT had an N2 disease detection sensitivity of 48% (11 of 23 patients), a specificity of 95% (153 of 161), and an accuracy of 89% (164 of 184). The 3-year DFS rate in the PET/CT FN group (31%, 95% confidence interval [CI]; 13.6-48.0%) was similar to that of the TP group (16%, 95% CI; 1.7-29.5%) (p = 0.649), but both groups had significantly shorter DFS rates than the P-TN group (77%, 95% CI; 72.0-81.2%) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The PET/CT shows a high specificity, but low sensitivity for detecting N2 disease in stage T1 NSCLC. Patients with PET/CT FN N2 disease have survival rates similar to PET/CT TP N2 disease patients, which are both substantially shorter than the survival rate of P-TN patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available