Radiology, Vol 195, 339-344, Copyright © 1995 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET in detection of pancreatic cancer: value of quantitative image interpretation

JC Stollfuss, G Glatting, H Friess, F Kocher, HG Berger and SN Reske
Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Ulm, Germany.

PURPOSE: To evaluate use of positron emission tomography (PET) versus computed tomography (CT) in detection of pancreatic cancer and determine the value of quantitative and visual image interpretation of these techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within 8 weeks before surgery, 73 patients with suspected pancreatic cancer or chronic pancreatitis underwent imaging with CT and with static PET after injection of 250- 350 MBq of 2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG). Focal FDG uptake, considered a sign of malignancy, was calculated with standardized uptake values (SUVs) 60 minutes after injection. RESULTS: With FDG PET, pancreatic carcinoma was correctly diagnosed in 41 (95%) of 43 patients, and chronic pancreatitis in 27 (90%) of 30 patients. With an SUV cutoff value of 1.53, both sensitivity and specificity for detection of malignancy were 93%. With CT, pancreatic cancer was correctly diagnosed in 33 (80%) of 41 patients, whereas results in seven (26%) of 27 patients with chronic pancreatitis were false- positive (specificity, 74%). CONCLUSION: FDG PET enabled reliable differentiation of pancreatic adenocarcinoma from chronic pancreatitis. The sensitivity and specificity of visual image interpretation with FDG PET was statistically significantly higher (P < .05) than with CT.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. J. A. Margolis, J. M. Hoffman, R. J. Herfkens, R. B. Jeffrey, A. Quon, and S. S. Gambhir Molecular Imaging Techniques in Body Imaging Radiology, November 1, 2007; 245(2): 333 - 356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B B Chin and R L Wahl 18F-Fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of gastrointestinal malignancies Gut, June 1, 2003; 52(90004): iv23 - 29. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. C. Buck, H. H. Schirrmeister, C.-A. Guhlmann, C. G. Diederichs, C. Shen, I. Buchmann, J. Kotzerke, D. Birk, T. Mattfeldt, and S. N. Reske Ki-67 Immunostaining in Pancreatic Cancer and Chronic Active Pancreatitis: Does In Vivo FDG Uptake Correlate with Proliferative Activity? J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2001; 42(5): 721 - 725. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				U. Seitz, M. Wagner, A. T. Vogg, G. Glatting, B. Neumaier, F. R. Greten, R. M. Schmid, and S. N. Reske In Vivo Evaluation of 5-[18F]Fluoro-2'-deoxyuridine as Tracer for Positron Emission Tomography in a Murine Pancreatic Cancer Model Cancer Res., May 1, 2001; 61(10): 3853 - 3857. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				S. S. Gambhir, J. Czernin, J. Schwimmer, D. H. S. Silverman, R. E. Coleman, and M. E. Phelps A Tabulated Summary of the FDG PET Literature J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2001; 42(90050): 1S - 93. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Schulte, D. Brecht-Krauss, B. Heymer, A. Guhlmann, E. Hartwig, M. R. Sarkar, C. G. Diederichs, A. V. Baer, J. Kotzerke, and S. N. Reske Grading of Tumors and Tumorlike Lesions of Bone: Evaluation by FDG PET J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2000; 41(10): 1695 - 1701. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. D. Shreve, Y. Anzai, and R. L. Wahl Pitfalls in Oncologic Diagnosis with FDG PET Imaging: Physiologic and Benign Variants RadioGraphics, January 1, 1999; 19(1): 61 - 77. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. G. Strauss Positron Emission Tomography: Current Role for Diagnosis and Therapy Monitoring in Oncology Oncologist, December 1, 1997; 2(6): 381 - 388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]