Surgical staging and treatment of anal carcinoma has been replaced by noninvasive staging studies and combined modality therapy. In this study, we compare computed tomography (CT) and physical examination to [(18)F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in the staging of carcinoma of the anal canal, with special emphasis on determination of spread to inguinal lymph nodes.
Between July 2003 and July 2005, 41 consecutive patients with biopsy-proved anal carcinoma underwent a complete staging evaluation including physical examination, CT, and 2-FDG-PET/CT. Patients ranged in age from 30 to 89 years. Nine men were HIV-positive. Treatment was with standard Nigro regimen.
[(18)F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) detected 91% of nonexcised primary tumors, whereas CT visualized 59%. FDG-PET/CT detected abnormal uptake in pelvic nodes of 5 patients with normal pelvic CT scans. FDG-PET/CT detected abnormal nodes in 20% of groins that were normal by CT, and in 23% without abnormality on physical examination. Furthermore, 17% of groins negative by both CT and physical examination showed abnormal uptake on FDG-PET/CT. HIV-positive patients had an increased frequency of PET-positive lymph nodes.
[(18)F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography detects the primary tumor more often than CT. FDG-PET/CT detects substantially more abnormal inguinal lymph nodes than are identified by standard clinical staging with CT and physical examination.
"Staging of anal cancer by clinical assessment (primary and inguinal nodes) was later supplemented by the use of computed tomography (CT) (Scherrer et al, 1990) and, in some cases, additional anatomic imaging of the pelvis with magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound. Multiple recent studies have now demonstrated the utility of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in detecting inguinal or pelvic node involvement not evident clinically or on CT (Trautmann and Zuger, 2005; Cotter et al, 2006; Nguyen et al, 2008; Iagaru et al, 2009; de Winton et al, 2009), with subsequent impact on the planning of definitive radiotherapy fields (Nguyen et al, 2008; de Winton et al, 2009). The FDG-PET staging of anal cancer has become the standard of care in many centres. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The aim was to investigate the correlation between (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) metabolic response to chemoradiotherapy and clinical outcomes in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the anus.
A total of 48 patients with biopsy-proven anal SCC underwent FDG-PET scans at baseline and post chemoradiotherapy (54 Gy, concurrent 5-FU/mitomycin). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine survival outcomes according to FDG-PET metabolic response.
In all, 79% patients (n=38) had a complete metabolic response (CMR) at all sites of disease, 15% (n=7) had a CMR in regional nodes but only partial response in the primary tumour (overall partial metabolic response (PMR)) and 6% (n=3) had progressive distant disease despite CMR locoregionally (overall no response (NR)). The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 95% for patients with a CMR, 71% for PMR and 0% for NR (P<0.0001). The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 88% in CMR, 69% in PMR and 0% in NR (P<0.0001). Cox proportional hazards regression analyses for PFS and OS found significant associations for incomplete (PMR+NR) vs complete FDG-PET response to treatment only, (HR 4.1 (95% CI: 1.5-11.5, P=0.013) and 6.7 (95% CI: 2.1-21.6, P=0.002), respectively).
FDG-PET metabolic response to chemoradiotherapy in anal cancer is significantly associated with PFS and OS, and in this cohort incomplete FDG-PET response was a stronger predictor than T or N stage.
British Journal of Cancer 08/2011; 105(4):498-504. DOI:10.1038/bjc.2011.274 · 4.84 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.