skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: What Does PET Imaging Add to Conventional Staging of Head and Neck Cancer Patients?

Abstract

Purpose: To determine the value of PET scans in the staging of patients with head and neck carcinoma. Methods and Materials: The charts of 25 patients who underwent neck dissection, computed tomography (CT) scan, and F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging as part of their initial work-up for a head and neck squamous cell cancer between 2000-2003 were reviewed. All patients underwent clinical examination, triple endoscopy, and chest radiograph as part of their clinical staging, adhering to American Joint Commission for Cancer criteria. In addition to the clinical nodal (N) stage, PET findings were incorporated to determine a second type of N staging: clinical N + PET stage. The number of neck sides and nodal levels involved on CT or PET and on pathologic examination were recorded. Results: The sensitivity and specificity for detection of nodal disease were similar for CT and FDG-PET. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were similar for both diagnostic tests. None of our 25 patients had unsuspected distant disease detected by PET. Conclusion: The addition of PET imaging did not improve diagnostic accuracy in our patients compared with CT. PET scanning did not alter clinical management in any of the patients.

Authors:
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [2];  [4];  [5]
  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States) and Department of Radiation Oncology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA (United States). E-mail: poharss@evms.edu
  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)
  3. Department of Medicine, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)
  4. Department of Otolaryngology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)
  5. Department of Radiology, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
20951656
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics; Journal Volume: 68; Journal Issue: 2; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.044; PII: S0360-3016(07)00065-X; Copyright (c) 2007 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands, All rights reserved; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE; ACCURACY; CARCINOMAS; CHEST; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; FLUORINE 18; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE; HEAD; IMAGES; NECK; PATIENTS; POSITRON COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY; SPECIFICITY

Citation Formats

Pohar, Surjeet, Brown, Robert B.S., Newman, Nancy, Koniarczyk, Michael, Hsu, Jack, and Feiglin, David. What Does PET Imaging Add to Conventional Staging of Head and Neck Cancer Patients?. United States: N. p., 2007. Web. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.044.
Pohar, Surjeet, Brown, Robert B.S., Newman, Nancy, Koniarczyk, Michael, Hsu, Jack, & Feiglin, David. What Does PET Imaging Add to Conventional Staging of Head and Neck Cancer Patients?. United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.044.
Pohar, Surjeet, Brown, Robert B.S., Newman, Nancy, Koniarczyk, Michael, Hsu, Jack, and Feiglin, David. Fri . "What Does PET Imaging Add to Conventional Staging of Head and Neck Cancer Patients?". United States. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.044.
@article{osti_20951656,
title = {What Does PET Imaging Add to Conventional Staging of Head and Neck Cancer Patients?},
author = {Pohar, Surjeet and Brown, Robert B.S. and Newman, Nancy and Koniarczyk, Michael and Hsu, Jack and Feiglin, David},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To determine the value of PET scans in the staging of patients with head and neck carcinoma. Methods and Materials: The charts of 25 patients who underwent neck dissection, computed tomography (CT) scan, and F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging as part of their initial work-up for a head and neck squamous cell cancer between 2000-2003 were reviewed. All patients underwent clinical examination, triple endoscopy, and chest radiograph as part of their clinical staging, adhering to American Joint Commission for Cancer criteria. In addition to the clinical nodal (N) stage, PET findings were incorporated to determine a second type of N staging: clinical N + PET stage. The number of neck sides and nodal levels involved on CT or PET and on pathologic examination were recorded. Results: The sensitivity and specificity for detection of nodal disease were similar for CT and FDG-PET. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were similar for both diagnostic tests. None of our 25 patients had unsuspected distant disease detected by PET. Conclusion: The addition of PET imaging did not improve diagnostic accuracy in our patients compared with CT. PET scanning did not alter clinical management in any of the patients.},
doi = {10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.044},
journal = {International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics},
number = 2,
volume = 68,
place = {United States},
year = {Fri Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007},
month = {Fri Jun 01 00:00:00 EDT 2007}
}