[18F]FDG PET/MRI versus contrast-enhanced MRI in detecting regional HNSCC metastases
- PMID: 33454923
- DOI: 10.1007/s12149-020-01565-5
[18F]FDG PET/MRI versus contrast-enhanced MRI in detecting regional HNSCC metastases
Abstract
Objective: To compare the accuracy of contrast-enhanced MRI using established dimensional and morphological criteria versus integrated [18F]FDG PET/MRI in identifying regional lymph node metastases in patients with newly diagnosed head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). For this purpose, we compare MRI and PET/MRI using the histopathological findings in dissected lymph nodes as the gold standard.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 26 patients with histologically proven HNSCC who underwent gadolinium-enhanced [18F]FDG PET/MRI as part of their staging. All neck lymph nodes were classified on MRI using dimensional and/or morphological criteria. Then, they were jointly assessed by a nuclear medicine physician and a radiologist using integrated [18F]PET/MR images. ROC curves were obtained to compare the techniques. Lymph node histopathology was considered as the reference standard.
Results: Out of 865 lymph nodes, 35 were malignant at histopathology (3 with micro-metastases). Sensitivity and specificity were 48.6% and 99.5% for MRI using dimensional criteria; 60.0% and 99.6% for MRI using morphological criteria; 60.0% and 99.4% for MRI using both; and 74.3% and 97.6% for PET using MR as anatomic localization. The area under the ROC curve was higher for PET and MRI localization (0.859) than for MRI using dimensional (0.740; p < 0.05), or morphological (0.798; p < 0.05), or both criteria (0.797; p < 0.05). PET/MR using a PET SUVmax cutoff of 5.7 combined with MRI using dimensional and/or morphological criteria reached high values for accuracy (98.2%), NPV (98.2%), and PPV (95.2%).
Conclusions: Compared with traditional contrast-enhanced MRI or PET alone, integrated PET/MRI could improve diagnostic accuracy in detecting metastatic lymph nodes in patients with HNSCC.
Keywords: HNSCC; Lymph nodes; PET/MRI.
References
-
- Boscolo-Rizzo P, Furlan C, Lupato V, Polesel J, Fratta E. Novel insights into epigenetic drivers of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma: role of HPV and lifestyle factors. Clin Epigenetics. 2017;9:124. - DOI
-
- Leemans CR, Tiwari R, Nauta JJ, van der Waal I, Snow GB. Recurrence at the primary site in head and neck cancer and the significance of neck lymph node metastases as a prognostic factor. Cancer. 1994;73(1):187–90. - DOI
-
- Grégoire V, Lefebvre J-L, Licitra L, Felip E, EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Guidelines Working Group. Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: EHNS-ESMO-ESTRO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2010;21(Suppl 5):v184-6.
-
- Mehanna H, Wong W-L, McConkey CC, Rahman JK, Robinson M, Hartley AGJ, et al. PET-CT surveillance versus neck dissection in advanced head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(15):1444–54. - DOI
-
- Ng S-H, Yen T-C, Liao C-T, Chang JT-C, Chan S-C, Ko S-F, et al. 18F-FDG PET and CT/MRI in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective study of 124 patients with histologic correlation. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(7):1136–43. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical