Download PDF
Nuklearmedizin 2012; 51(05): 186-193
DOI: 10.3413/Nukmed-0470-12-01
Original article
Schattauer GmbH

18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT findings in pleural effusions of patients with known cancer

A cytopathological correlationIdentifikation maligner Pleura-Ergüsse mittels 18F-Fluordeoxyglukose-PET/CTEine Korrelation mit zytopathologischen Befunden
I. Letovanec
1   University Institute of Pathology, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
G. Allenbach
2   Department of Nuclear Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
A. Mihaescu
1   University Institute of Pathology, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
M. Nicod Lalonde
2   Department of Nuclear Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
S. Schmidt
3   Department of Radio logy, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
R. Stupp
4   Department of Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
J.-W. Fitting
5   Department of Pneumology, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
A. Boubaker
2   Department of Nuclear Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
H.-B. Ris
6   Department of Thoracic Surgery, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
,
J. O. Prior
2   Department of Nuclear Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 23 January 2012

accepted in revised form: 03 May 2012

Publication Date:
02 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Aim: Pleural effusion is common in cancer patients and to determine its malignant origin is of huge clinical significance. PET/CT with 18F-FDG is of diagnostic value in staging and follow-up, but its ability to differentiate between malignant and benign effusions is not precisely known. Patients, methods: We examined 50 PET/CT from 47 patients (29 men, 18 women, 60 ± 16 years) with pleural effusion and known cancer (24 NSCLC, 7 lymphomas, 5 breasts, 4 GIST, 3 mesotheliomas, 2 head and neck, 2 malignant teratoma, 1 colorectal, 1 oesophageal, 1 melanoma) for FDG uptake in the effusions using SUVmax. This was correlated to cytopathology performed after a median of 21 days (interquartile range –3 to 23), which included pH, relative distribution (macrophages, neutrophils, eosinophils, basophils, lymphocytes, plasmocytes), and absolute cell count. Results: Malignant cells were found in 17 effusions (34%) (6 NSCLC, 5 lymphomas, 2 breasts, 2 mesotheliomas, 2 malignant teratomas). SUV in malignant effusions were higher than in benign ones [3.7 (95%CI 1.8–5.6) vs. 1.7 g/ml (1.5–1.9), p = 0.001], with a correlation between malignant effuUntersion and SUV (Spearman coefficient ρ = 0.50, p = 0.001), but not with other cytopathological or radiological parameters (ROC area 0.83 ± 0.06). Using a 2.2-mg/l SUV threshold, 12 PET/CT studies were positive and 38 negative with sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of 53%, 91%, 75% and 79%, respectively. For NSCLC only (n = 24), ROC area was 0.95 ± 0.04, 7 studies were positive and 17 negative with a sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of 83%, 89%, 71 and 94%, respectively. Conclusion: PET/CT may help to differentiate the malignant or benign origin of a pleural effusion with a high specificity in patients with known cancer, in particular NSCLC.

Zusammenfassung

Ziel: Pleuraerguss ist ein häufiges Symptom, auch bei onkologischen Patienten, ohne dass es sich obligat um eine maligne Ätiologie handeln muss. Der Charakter des Ergusses und seine Pathogenese sind jedoch für weitere therapeutische Maßnahmen entscheidend. Die Wertigkeit der 18F-FDG-PET/CT für Staging und Nachsorge ist unbestritten, ob aber die PET zwischen malignem und benignem Erguss unterscheiden kann wurde noch wenig untersucht. Patienten und Methodik: Wir untersuchten 47 Tumor-Patienten (29 Männer, 18 Frauen, 60 ± 16 Jahre) mit Pleuraergüssen [24 nicht-kleinzellige Lungenkarzinome (NSCLC), 7 Lymphome, 5 Mammakarzinome, 4 GIST, 3 Mesotheliome, 2 HNO-Karzinome, 2 maligne Teratome, 1 Kolon/ Rektumkarzinom, 1 Ösophaguskarzinom, 1 Melanom] mit insgesamt 50 PET/CT. Die FDG-Konzentration in den Ergüssen wurde anhand Messungen des SUVmax, normalisiert auf das Körpergewicht geschätzt. Die Pleuraergüsse wurden alle punktiert, im Mittel 21 Tage (Interquartilbereich –6 bis +23 Tage) nach der PET-Untersuchung, und zytologisch untersucht, ebenso wurde die zelluläre Zusammensetzung (Makrophagen, Neutrophile, Eosinophile, Basophile, Lymphozyten, Plasmozyten) quantifiziert und der pH-Wert bestimmt. Ergebnis: Siebzehn Pleuraergüsse (34%) enthielten maligne Zellen (6 NSCLC, 5 Lymphome, 2 Mammakarzinome, 2 Mesotheliome, 2 maligne Teratome) und zeigten einen höheren SUVmax-Wert als Ergüsse ohne klare maligne Ursache [3,7 (95%CI 1,8–5,6) vs. 1,7 g/ml (1,5–1,9), p = 0,001]. Die malignen Pleuraergüsse korrelierten lediglich mit dem SUV (Spearman-Koeffizient ρ = 0,50, p = 0,001), jedoch nicht mit zytologischen oder radiologischen Parametern (ROC-Area 0,83 ± 0,06). Bei einer SUVmax-Schwelle von 2,2 mg/l, waren 12 PET/CT Untersuchungen positiv und 38 negativ, mit 53% Sensitivität, 91% Spezifizität, was sich in einen 75% positiven und 79% negativen prädiktiven Wert übersetzt. Analysieren wir lediglich NSCLC (n = 24) wird eine ROC von 0,95 ± 0,04 errechnet, 7 Unter suchungen waren positiv und 17 negativ, mit 83% Sensitivität, 89% Spezifizität, und somit 71% positivem und 94% negativem prädiktivem Wert. Schlussfolgerung: Die PET/CT erlaubt mit hoher Spezifizität zwischen malignen und benignen Pleuraergüssen zu unterscheiden, insbesondere bei NSCLC. Der negative prädiktive Wert von >90% ist klinisch von Bedeutung.

Keywords

Pleural effusion - tumour - PET/CT - FDG

Schlüsselwörter

Pleuraerguss - Tumor - EPT/CT - FDG
 

  • References

  • 1 Ahmad Z, Krishnadas R, Froeschle P. Pleural effusion: diagnosis and management. J Perioper Pract 2009; 19: 242-247.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Alkhawaldeh K, Biersack HJ, Henke A, Ezziddin S. Impact of dual-time-point 18F-FDG PET/CT in the assessment of pleural effusion in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Clini Nucl Med 2011; 36: 423-428.
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Antony VB. Pleurodesis – testing the waters. Am Rev Respir Dis 1987; 135: 775-776.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Brenner H, Gefeller O. Variation of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and predictive values with disease prevalence. Stat Med 1997; 16: 981-991.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Brock MV, Hooker CM, Yung R. et al. Can we improve the cytologic examination of malignant pleural effusions using molecular analysis?. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 80: 1241-1247.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Carretta A, Landoni C, Melloni G. et al. 18FDG positron emission tomography in the evaluation of malignant pleural diseases - a pilot study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2000; 17: 377-383.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Duysinx BC, Larock MP, Nguyen D. et al. 18F-FDG PET imaging in assessing exudative pleural effusions. Nucl Med Commun 2006; 27: 971-976.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Edge SBB, Compton CC, Fritz AG. et al. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual.. Springer: 2010: 646
  • 9 Erasmus JJ, McAdams HP, Rossi SE. et al. FDG PET of pleural effusions in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175: 245-249.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Fischer B, Lassen U, Mortensen J. et al. Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT. The N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 32-39.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gamez C, Rosell R, Fernandez A. et al. PET/CT fusion scan in lung cancer: current recommendations and innovations. J Thorac Oncol 2006; 1: 74-77.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Gupta NC, Rogers JS, Graeber GM. et al. Clinical role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in patients with lung cancer and suspected malignant pleural effusion. Chest 2002; 122: 1918-1924.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Heffner JE, Klein JS. Recent advances in the diagnosis and management of malignant pleural effusions. Mayo Clin Proc 2008; 83: 235-250.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ishimori T, Saga T, Mamede M. et al. Increased 18F-FDG uptake in a model of inflammation: concanavalin A-mediated lymphocyte activation. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 658-663.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Jeong YJ, Kim S, Kwak SW. et al. Neoplastic and nonneoplastic conditions of serosal membrane origin: CT findings. Radiographics 2008; 28: 801-818.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kim BS, Kim IJ, Kim SJ. et al. Predictive value of 18F-FDG PET/CT for malignant pleural effusion in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Onkologie 2011; 34: 298-303.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kubota R, Yamada S, Kubota K. et al. Intratumoral distribution of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in vivo: high accumulation in macrophages and granulation tissues studied by microautoradiography. J Nucl Med 1992; 33: 1972-1980.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Light RW. Clinical practice. Pleural effusion. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1971-1977.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Love C, Tomas MB, Tronco GG, Palestro CJ. FDG PET of infection and inflammation. Radiographics 2005; 25: 1357-1368.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Maskell NA, Butland RJ. BTS guidelines for the investigation of a unilateral pleural effusion in adults. Thorax 2003; 58 (Suppl. 02) ii8-ii17.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 McGrath EE, Anderson PB. Diagnosis of pleural effusion: a systematic approach. Am J Crit Care 2011; 20: 119-127.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Mochizuki T, Tsukamoto E, Kuge Y. et al. FDG uptake and glucose transporter subtype expressions in experimental tumor and inflammation models. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 1551-1555.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Park SH, Goo JM, Jo CH. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean J Radiol 2004; 5: 11-18.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Poeppel TD, Krause BJ, Heusner TA. et al. PET/CT for the staging and follow-up of patients with malignancies. Eur J Radiol 2009; 70: 382-392.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Schaffler GJ, Wolf G, Schoellnast H. et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: evaluation of pleural abnormalities on CT scans with 18F FDG PET. Radiology 2004; 231: 858-865.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Starr RL, Sherman ME. The value of multiple preparations in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions. A cost-benefit analysis. Acta Cytol 1991; 35: 533-537.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Toaff JS, Metser U, Gottfried M. et al. Differentiation between malignant and benign pleural effusion in patients with extra-pleural primary malignancies: assessment with positron emission tomography-computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2005; 40: 204-209.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Wahl RL. To AC or not to AC: that is the question. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 2025-2028.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wicky S, Wintermark M, Schnyder P. et al. Imaging of blunt chest trauma. Eur Radiol 2000; 10: 1524-1538.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Yoneda KY, Mathur PN, Gasparini S. The evolving role of interventional pulmonary in the interdisciplinary approach to the staging and management of lung cancer. Part III: diagnosis and management of malignant pleural effusions. Clin Lung Cancer 2007; 8: 535-547.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar