Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2019; 40(02): 217-221
DOI: 10.4103/ijmpo.ijmpo_226_17
Original Article

Comparison of Efficacy of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography with Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography in Pretreatment Evaluation of Head and Neck Cancers: An Institutional Experience

Mayuri Jain
Departments of Radiation Oncology, Army Hospital RnR, New Delhi, India
,
Arti Sarin
Departments of Radiation Oncology, Army Hospital RnR, New Delhi, India
,
V Suhag
Departments of Radiation Oncology, Army Hospital RnR, New Delhi, India
,
GPS Gahlot
Departments of Pathology, Army Hospital RnR, New Delhi, India
,
Anurag Jain
Departments of Nuclear Medicine, Army Hospital RnR, New Delhi, India
,
A Bandhopadhya
Departments of Surgical Oncology, Army Hospital RnR, New Delhi, India
› Author Affiliations Financial support and sponsorship Nil.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction: Head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) constitute 5.4% of all cancers worldwide, and 23% of all cancers in males and 6% of all cancers in females diagnosed in India. Lots of ambiguity exists in primary, nodal, and metastatic workup of these patients, especially in developing countries. Aim: The study was designed to compare the accuracy of whole-body positron emission tomography/computed tomography (WBPET/CT) scan with contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) face and neck as pretreatment evaluation for staging workup and management decision and to confirm the nodal findings on imaging with fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC). Design: It was a single-institute, prospective, observational, interventional study over a 2-year period. All cases of SCC of upper aerodigestive tract who were scheduled for definitive treatment concurrent chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy were evaluated with routine investigations followed by imaging in the form of CECT face and neck and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) WBPET/CT. Results: In the 40 enrolled patients, all underwent CECT face and neck and WBPET/CT. During initial workup, biopsy was taken from primary site and FNAC was done from neck nodes for diagnosis and for staging. In 40 patients, CECT neck showed nodal metastasis in 39 patients; however, FNAC came positive in 38 cases. PET/CT showed nodal metastasis in 38 patients; however, FNAC came positive in 38 cases. Any node with Standardized uptake value (SUV) >2.5 was taken as suspicious lesion and FNAC was done. Sensitivity of CECT and PET/CT was 97.36% and 100%, respectively, while the specificity was 0% and 100%, respectively. Positive predictive value calculated for CECT and WBPET was 94.87% and 100%, respectively, while the negative predictive value for CECT and WBPET was 0% and 100%, respectively. Conclusion: In head and neck SCC, FDG-PET/CT is more accurate than CECT in staging of the neck.

Keywords

Computed tomography scan - fine-needle aspiration cytology - Head and Neck Cancers - positron emission tomography scan


Publication History

Article published online:
03 June 2021

© 2019. Indian Society of Medical and Paediatric Oncology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Ries LA, Melbert D, Krapcho M, Stinchcomb DG. editors SEER Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2005. Bethesda MD:
    Google Scholar
  • 2 National Cancer Registry Programme. Biennial Report (1988-1989) of the National Cancer Registry Programme. New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research, Surya Printers; 1992: 3-42
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Hermans Robert. Head and Neck Imaging Technique. P31-42,49-56
  • 4 Seminar in surgical Oncology. National cancer Institute, TMH 1989;5305-309
  • 5 Bourhis J, Le Maître A, Baujat B, Audry H, Pignon JP. Meta-Analysis of Chemotherapy in Head, Neck Cancer Collaborative Group. et al. Individual patients' data meta-analyses in head and neck cancer. Curr Opin Oncol 2007; 19: 188-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gordin A, Daitzchman M, Doweck I, Yefremov N, Golz A, Keidar Z. et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in patients with carcinoma of the larynx: Diagnostic accuracy and impact on clinical management. Laryngoscope 2006; 116: 273-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Scarfone C, Lavely WC, Cmelak AJ, Delbeke D, Martin WH, Billheimer D. et al. Prospective feasibility trial of radiotherapy target definition for head and neck cancer using 3-dimensional PET and CT imaging. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 543-52
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sullivan BP, Parks KA, Dean NR, Rosenthal EL, Carroll WR, Magnuson JS. et al. Utility of CT surveillance for primary site recurrence of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Head Neck 2011; 33: 1547-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hannah A, Scott AM, Tochon-Danguy H, Chan JG, Akhurst T, Berlangieri S. et al. Evaluation of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography with histopathologic correlation in the initial staging of head and neck cancer. Ann Surg 2002; 236: 208-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Schmid DT, Stoeckli SJ, Bandhauer F, Huguenin P, Schmid S, von Schulthess GK, Goerres GW. et al. Impact of positron emission tomography on the initial staging and therapy in locoregional advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Laryngoscope. 2003; 113: 888-9150
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ng SH, Yen TC, Liao CT, Chang JT, Chan SC, Ko SF. 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: 1136-43
    PubMedGoogle Scholar