TY - JOUR T1 - Whole-Body <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT Is Superior to CT as First-Line Diagnostic Imaging in Patients Referred with Serious Nonspecific Symptoms or Signs of Cancer: A Randomized Prospective Study of 200 Patients JF - Journal of Nuclear Medicine JO - J Nucl Med SP - 1058 LP - 1064 DO - 10.2967/jnumed.116.175380 VL - 58 IS - 7 AU - Anne-Mette Lebech AU - Anne Gaardsting AU - Annika Loft AU - Jesper Graff AU - Elena Markova AU - Anne Kiil Bertelsen AU - Jan Lysgård Madsen AU - Kim Francis Andersen AU - Eric von Benzon AU - Morten Helms AU - Lars R. Mathiesen AU - Kim P. David AU - Gitte Kronborg AU - Andreas Kjaer Y1 - 2017/07/01 UR - http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/58/7/1058.abstract N2 - A fast-track pathway has been established in Denmark to investigate patients with serious nonspecific symptoms and signs of cancer (NSSC), who are not eligible to enter an organ-specific cancer program. The prevalence of cancer in this cohort is approximately 20%. The optimal screening strategy in patients with NSSC remains unknown. The aim of the study was to investigate whether 18F-FDG PET/CT was superior to CT as an initial imaging modality in patients with NSSC. In a randomized prospective trial, the imaging modalities were compared with regard to diagnostic performance. Methods: Two hundred patients were randomized 1:1 to whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT or CT of the thorax and abdomen as the imaging modality. A tentative diagnosis was established after first-line imaging. The final referral diagnosis was adjudicated by the physician, when sufficient data were available. Results: One hundred ninety-seven patients were available for analysis because 3 patients withdrew consent before scanning. Thirty-nine (20%) patients were diagnosed with cancer, 10 (5%) with an infection, 15 (8%) with an autoimmune disease, and 76 (39%) with other diseases. In the remaining 57 patients (28%), no specific disease was found. 18F-FDG PET/CT had a higher specificity (96% vs. 85%; P = 0.028) and a higher accuracy (94% vs. 82%; P = 0.017) than CT. However, there were no statistically significant differences in sensitivity (83% vs. 70%) or negative predictive values (96% vs. 92%). No difference in days to final referral diagnosis according to randomization group could be shown (7.2 vs. 7.6 d). However, for the subgroups in which the imaging modality showed a suggestion of malignancy, there was a significant delay to final diagnosis in the CT group compared with the 18F-FDG PET/CT group (11.6 vs. 5.7 d; P = 0.02). Conclusion: Compared with CT, we found a higher diagnostic specificity and accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting cancer in patients with NSSC. 18F-FDG PET/CT should therefore be considered as first-line imaging in this group of patients. ER -