Abstract
Purpose
To determine the value of combined 18F-FDG PET/CT with diagnostic contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) in detecting primary malignancies and metastases in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndromes (PNS) and to compare this with CECT alone.
Methods
PET/CT scans from 66 patients with PNS were retrospectively evaluated. Two blinded readers initially reviewed the CECT portion of each PET/CT scan. In a second session 3 months later, the readers analysed the combined PET/CT scans. Findings on each study were assessed using a four-point-scale (1 normal/benign; 2 inconclusive, further diagnostic work-up may be necessary; 3 malignant; 4 inflammatory). Sensitivity and specificity for malignant findings were calculated for PET/CT and CECT. Interreader agreement was determined by calculating Cohen’s kappa. Pooled data from clinical follow-up (including histopathology and follow-up imaging, median follow-up 20.0 months) served as the reference gold standard.
Results
Both readers classified 12 findings in ten patients (15 %) as malignant on the PET/CT scans (two patients had two primary tumours). One such imaging finding (suspected thymic cancer) was false-positive (i.e. benign histology). The most common tumours were bronchial carcinoma (n = 3), lymph node metastases of gynaecological tumours (n = 3) and tonsillar carcinoma (n = 2). Three of 12 findings (25 %) were not detected by CECT alone (cervical carcinoma, lymph node metastasis and tonsillar carcinoma). In a per-patient analysis, sensitivity and specificity for malignant findings were 100 % and 90 % for PET/CT and 78 % and 88 % for CECT. In 24 % (reader 1) and 21 % (reader 2) of the patients, the PET/CT findings were inconclusive. Of these findings, 57 % (reader 1) and 56 % (reader 2) were only diagnosed with PET (e.g. focal FDG uptake of the thyroid, gastrointestinal tract and ovaries). On follow-up, none of these findings corresponded to malignancy. Overall agreement between the two readers was excellent with a Cohen’s kappa of 0.95 ± 0.04 (p < 0.001) for PET/CT and 0.97 ± 0.03 (p < 0.001) for CECT alone.
Conclusion
In this cohort of patients with PNS, PET/CT exhibited improved detection of underlying malignancy versus CECT alone. While hybrid imaging produces a greater number of inconclusive findings, sensitivity is increased for the detection of head and neck and gynaecological malignancies as well as metastatic lymph node involvement.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2000;284:3043–5.
Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Beyer T, Bockisch A, Debatin JF. To enhance or not to enhance? 18F-FDG and CT contrast agents in dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45 Suppl 1:56S–65S.
Antoine JC, Cinotti L, Tilikete C, Bouhour F, Camdessanché JP, Confavreux C, et al. [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of cancer in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndrome and anti-Hu antibodies. Ann Neurol. 2000;48:105–8.
Bannas P, Weber C, Derlin T, Lambert J, Leypoldt F, Adam G, et al. 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: a retrospective analysis. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:923–30.
Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, Gaitini D, Frenkel A, Kuten A, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1200–9.
Basu S, Alavi A. Unparalleled contribution of 18F-FDG PET to medicine over 3 decades. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:17N–21N 37N.
Bomanji JB, Costa DC, Ell PJ. Clinical role of positron emission tomography in oncology. Lancet Oncol. 2001;2:157–164.
Cashman EC, Macmahon PJ, Shelly MJ, Kavanagh EC. Role of positron emission tomography-computed tomography in head and neck cancer. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2011;120:593–602.
Chartrand-Lefebvre C, Howarth N, Grenier P, Keime F, Orcel B, Beigelman C. Association of small cell lung cancer and the anti-Hu paraneoplastic syndrome: radiographic and CT findings AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:1513–157.
Dalmau J, Rosenfeld MR. Paraneoplastic syndromes of the CNS. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:327–40.
Darnell RB, Posner JB. Paraneoplastic syndromes involving the nervous system. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1543–54.
Frings M, Antoch G, Knorn P, Freudenberg L, Bier U, Timmann D, et al. Strategies in detection of the primary tumour in anti-Yo associated paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration. J Neurol. 2005;252:197–201.
Graus F, Delattre JY, Antoine JC, Dalmau J, Giometto B, Grisold W, et al. Recommended diagnostic criteria for paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75:1135–40.
Graus F, Keime-Guibert F, Rene R, Benyahia B, Ribalta T, Ascaso C, et al. Anti-Hu-associated paraneoplastic encephalomyelitis: analysis of 200 patients. Brain. 2001;124:1138–48.
Hadjivassiliou M, Alder SJ, Van Beek EJ, Hanney MB, Lorenz E, Rao DG, et al. PET scan in clinically suspected paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: a 6-year prospective study in a regional neuroscience unit. Acta Neurol Scand. 2009;119:186–93.
Keime-Guibert F, Graus F, Fleury A, René R, Honnorat J, Broet P, et al. Treatment of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes with antineuronal antibodies (Anti-Hu, anti-Yo) with a combination of immunoglobulins, cyclophosphamide, and methylprednisolone. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2000;68:479–82.
Kumar A, Regmi SK, Dutta R, Kumar R, Gupta SD, Das P, et al. Characterization of thymic masses using (18)F-FDG PET-CT. Ann Nucl Med. 2009;23:569–77.
Linke R, Schroeder M, Helmberger T, Voltz R. Antibody-positive paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes: value of CT and PET for tumor diagnosis. Neurology. 2004;63:282–6.
Liu J, Xu Y, Wang J. Ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Radiol. 2007;62:328–34.
Liu RS, Yeh SH, Huang MH, Wang LS, Chu LS, Chang CP, et al. Use of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of thymoma: a preliminary report. Eur J Nucl Med. 1995;22:1402–7.
Matsuhisa A, Toriihara A, Kubota K, Makino T, Mizusawa H, Shibuya H, et al. Utility of F-18 FDG PET/CT in screening for paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:39–43.
Patel RR, Subramaniam RM, Mandrekar JN, Hammack JE, Lowe VJ, Jett JR, et al. Occult malignancy in patients with suspected paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes: value of positron emission tomography in diagnosis. Mayo Clin Proc 2008;83:917–22.
Rees JH, Hain SF, Johnson MR, Hughes RA, Costa DC, Ell PJ, et al. The role of [18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose-PET scanning in the diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurological disorders. Brain. 2001;124:2223–31.
Rojas I, Graus F, Keime-Guibert F, Reñé R, Delattre JY, Ramón JM, et al. Long-term clinical outcome of paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration and anti-Yo antibodies. Neurology. 2000;55:713–5.
Rosenfeld MR, Dalmau J. Update on paraneoplastic neurologic disorders. Oncologist. 2010;15:603–17.
Rudnicki SA, Dalmau J. Paraneoplastic syndromes of the spinal cord, nerve, and muscle. Muscle Nerve. 2000;23:1800–18.
Titulaer MJ, Soffietti R, Dalmau J, Gilhus NE, Giometto B, Graus F, et al. Screening for tumours in paraneoplastic syndromes: report of an EFNS task force. Eur J Neurol. 2011;18:19–e13.
Titulaer MJ, Wirtz PW, Willems LN, van Kralingen KW, Smitt PA, Verschuuren JJ, et al. Screening for small-cell lung cancer: a follow-up study of patients with Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4276–81.
Tsujikawa T, Tsuchida T, Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kiyono Y, Okazawa H, et al. Role of PET/CT in gynecological tumors based on the revised FIGO staging classification. Clin Nucl Med. 2011;36:e114–8.
Vedeler CA, Antoine JC, Giometto B, Graus F, Grisold W, Hart IK, et al. Management of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: report of an EFNS Task Force. Eur J Neurol. 2006;13:682–90.
Voltz R. Paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: an update on diagnosis, pathogenesis, and therapy. Lancet Neurol. 2002;1:294–305.
Younes-Mhenni S, Janier MF, Cinotti L, Antoine JC, Tronc F, Cottin V, et al. FDG-PET improves tumour detection in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. Brain. 2004;127:2331–8.
Conflicts of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schramm, N., Rominger, A., Schmidt, C. et al. Detection of underlying malignancy in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40, 1014–1024 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2372-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2372-4