PDF herunterladen
Nuklearmedizin 2023; 62(04): 252-259
DOI: 10.1055/a-2127-7699
Original Article

The Role of 68Ga FAPI-04 and 18F-FDG PET/CT in Detecting Liver Metastases in Different Types of Cancer

Die Rolle von 68Ga-FAPI-04 und 18F-FDG-PET/CT beim Nachweis von Lebermetastasen bei verschiedenen Krebsarten
İhsan Kaplan
1   Nuclear Medicine, Diyarbakir Gazi Yasargil Training and Research Hospital, Diyarbakir, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN226851)
,
Ferat Kepenek
1   Nuclear Medicine, Diyarbakir Gazi Yasargil Training and Research Hospital, Diyarbakir, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN226851)
,
Yunus Güzel
1   Nuclear Medicine, Diyarbakir Gazi Yasargil Training and Research Hospital, Diyarbakir, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN226851)
,
Canan Can
1   Nuclear Medicine, Diyarbakir Gazi Yasargil Training and Research Hospital, Diyarbakir, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN226851)
,
Halil Kömek
1   Nuclear Medicine, Diyarbakir Gazi Yasargil Training and Research Hospital, Diyarbakir, Turkey (Ringgold ID: RIN226851)
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective We compared the diagnostic accuracies of 68Ga FAPI-04 PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting liver metastases (LMs) in patients with different cancer types.

Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 63 patients with liver lesions who underwent 18F-FDG PET/CT and 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT between May 2020 and May 2022. Patients with histopathologically confirmed primary diagnoses, data that could be accessed retrospectively, liver lesions confirmed by biopsy over at least 3–6 months of follow-up (via ultrasonography, CT, magnetic resonance imaging, PET/CT, or laboratory tests) were included. Patients with secondary malignancies or primary liver malignancies, and/or who could not be followed-up, were excluded.

Results Of the 63 total patients, 34 (54%) were female, and the mean age was 61 (30–92) years. There were 582 LMs in 51 patients and 35 benign liver lesions in 20 (12 patients had only benign and 8 both benign and malignant lesions). Of the 582 LMs, 472 (81.1%) evidenced 18F-FDG uptake and 572 (98.2%) 68Ga-FAPI uptake. The diagnostic accuracies of 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT were 98% and 82%, respectively (p < 0.001; McNemar test). When the LMs were compared, the maximum standardized uptake (SUVmax) value was significantly higher on 18F-FDG PET/CT than 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT (median: 6.0 vs. 5.4; p = 0.016). However, the LM-to-background ratio (TBR) was significantly higher on 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT than 18F-FDG PET/CT (median: 4.1 vs. 2.1; p < 0.001).

Conclusion 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT detected more LMs than did 18F-FDG PET/CT, and TBR was significantly higher on 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT than 18F-FDG PET/CT.

Keywords

68Ga FAPI-04 - 18F-FDG - SUVmax - Liver Metastasis - TBR


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 26. Oktober 2022

Angenommen nach Revision: 07. Juli 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
18. August 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Horn SR, Stoltzfus KC, Lehrer EJ. et al. Epidemiology of liver metastases. Cancer Epidemiol 2020; 67: 101760
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sivesgaard K, Larsen LP, Sørensen M. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of CE-CT, MRI and FDG PET/CT for detecting colorectal cancer liver metastases in patients considered eligible for hepatic resection and/or local ablation. Eur Radiol 2018; 28: 4735-4747
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 D’Souza MM, Sharma R, Mondal A. et al. Prospective evaluation of CECT and 18F-FDG-PET/CT in detection of hepatic metastases. Nucl Med Commun 2009; 30: 117-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jonsson J, Hemmingsson O, Strengbom R. et al. Does 18F-FDG PET/CT change the surgical management of potentially resectable colorectal liver metastases?. Scand J Surg 2022; 111 DOI: 10.1177/14574969221083144.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Borello A, Russolillo N, Lo Tesoriere R. et al. Diagnostic performance of the FDG-PET/CT in patients with resected mucinous colorectal liver metastases. Surgeon 2021; 19: e140-e145
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Park JW, Kim JH, Kim SK. et al. A prospective evaluation of 18F-FDG and 11C-acetate PET/CT for detection of primary and metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 1912-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Borello A, Russolillo N, Lo Tesoriere R. et al. Diagnostic performance of the FDG-PET/CT in patients with resected mucinous colorectal liver metastases. Surgeon 2021; 19 (05) e140-e145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Zi F, He J, He D. et al. Fibroblast activation protein α in tumor microenvironment: recent progression and implications (review). Mol Med Rep 2015; 11: 3203-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lindner T, Loktev A, Altmann A. et al. Development of quinoline-based theranostic ligands for the targeting of fibroblast activation protein. J Nucl Med 2018; 59: 415-22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Chen H, Pang Y, Wu J. et al. Comparison of [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 and [18F] FDG PET/CT for the diagnosis of primary and metastatic lesions in patients with various types of cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47: 1820-1832
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chen H, Zhao L, Ruan D. et al. Usefulness of [68Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/CT in patients presenting with inconclusive [18F]FDG PET/CT findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 73-86
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kömek H, Can C, Kaplan İ. et al. Comparison of [68 Ga]Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/CT and [18F]FDG PET/CT in colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022; 49: 3898-3909
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Gündoğan C, Kömek H, Can C. et al. Comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT in the staging and restaging of gastric adenocarcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 2022; 43: 64-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kömek H, Can C, Güzel Y. et al. 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT, a new step in breast cancer imaging: a comparative pilot study with the 18F-FDG PET/CT. Ann Nucl Med 2021; 35: 744-752
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Can C, Kepenek F, Kömek H. et al. Comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2022; 43 (10) 1084-1091
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Giesel FL, Kratochwil C, Lindner T. et al. 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT: Biodistribution and Preliminary Dosimetry Estimate of 2 DOTA-Containing FAP-Targeting Agents in Patients with Various Cancers. J Nucl Med 2019; 60: 386-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Tan GJ, Berlangieri SU, Lee ST. et al. FDG PET/CT in the liver: lesions mimicking malignancies. Abdom Imaging 2014; 39: 187-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kemeny NE, Ron IG. Liver Metastases. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol 1999; 2: 49-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Tsili AC, Alexiou G, Naka C. et al. Imaging of colorectal cancer liver metastases using contrast-enhanced US, multidetector CT, MRI, and FDG PET/CT: a meta-analysis. Acta Radiol 2021; 62: 302-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Guo W, Pang Y, Yao L. et al. Imaging fibroblast activation protein in liver cancer: a single-center post hoc retrospective analysis to compare [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT versus MRI and [18F]-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 1604-1617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Elboga U, Sahin E, Kus T. et al. Comparison of 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT and 18FDG PET/CT Modalities in Gastrointestinal System Malignancies with Peritoneal Involvement. Mol Imaging Biol 2022; 24 (05) 789-797
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Pang Y, Zhao L, Luo Z. et al. Comparison of 68Ga-FAPI and 18F-FDG Uptake in Gastric, Duodenal, and Colorectal Cancers. Radiology 2021; 298: 393-402
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Shi X, Xing H, Yang X. et al. Comparison of PET imaging of activated fibroblasts and 18F-FDG for diagnosis of primary hepatic tumours: a prospective pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 1593-1603
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Giesel FL, Kratochwil C, Schlittenhardt J. et al. Head-to-head intra-individual comparison of biodistribution and tumor uptake of 68Ga-FAPI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 4377-4385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Şahin E, Elboğa U, Çelen YZ. et al. Comparison of 68Ga-DOTA-FAPI and 18FDG PET/CT imaging modalities in the detection of liver metastases in patients with gastrointestinal system cancer. Eur J Radiol 2021; 142: 109867
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Wu J, Deng H, Zhong H. et al. Comparison of 68Ga-FAPI and 18F-FDG PET/CT in the Evaluation of Patients With Newly Diagnosed Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Front Oncol 2022; 12: 924223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Qin C, Shao F, Gai Y. et al. 68Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 PET/MR in the Evaluation of Gastric Carcinomas: Comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2022; 63: 81-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Elboga U, Sahin E, Kus T. et al. Superiority of 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT scan in detecting additional lesions compared to 18FDG PET/CT scan in breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med 2021; 35: 1321-1331
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Dendl K, Koerber SA, Finck R. et al. 68Ga-FAPI-PET/CT in patients with various gynecological malignancies. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 4089-4100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar