Multicenter Comparison of Contrast-Enhanced FDG PET/CT and 64-Slice Multi-Detector-Row CT for Initial Staging and Response Evaluation at the End of Treatment in Patients with Lymphoma

Objectives To compare staging correctness between contrast-enhanced FDG PET/ceCT and 64-slice multi-detector-row CT (ceCT64) for initial staging and response evaluation at the end of treatment (EOT) in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and follicular lymphoma. Me...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Gómez León, M. de las Nieves, Delgado Bolton, Roberto C., Campo del Val, María Lourdes del, Cabezas, Beatriz, Arranz Sáez, María Reyes, García, Marta, Cannata, Jimena, González Ortega, Saturnino, Pérez Sáez, Ángeles M., López-Botet Zulueta, Begoña, Rodríguez Vigil, Beatriz, Mateo, Marta, Colletti, Patrick M., Rubello, Domenico, Carreras, José L.
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:2017
País:España
Institución:Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
Repositorio:Biblos-e Archivo. Repositorio Institucional de la UAM
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.uam.es:10486/717167
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10486/717167
https://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000001718
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:CT
FDG PET/CT
Hodgkin lymphoma
lymphoma
non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Medicina
Descripción
Sumario:Objectives To compare staging correctness between contrast-enhanced FDG PET/ceCT and 64-slice multi-detector-row CT (ceCT64) for initial staging and response evaluation at the end of treatment (EOT) in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and follicular lymphoma. Methods This prospective study compared initial staging and response evaluation at EOT. One hundred eighty-one patients were randomly assigned to either ceCT64 or FDG PET/ceCT. A nuclear medicine physician and a radiologist read FDG PET/ceCT scans independently and achieved post hoc consensus, whereas another independent radiologist interpreted ceCT64 separately. The reference standard included all clinical information, all tests, and follow-up. Ethics committees of the participating centers approved the study, and all participants provided written consent. Results Ninety-one patients were randomized to ceCT64 and 90 to FDG PET/ceCT; 72 had Hodgkin lymphoma, 72 had DLBCL, and 37 had follicular lymphoma. There was excellent correlation between the reference standard and initial staging for both FDG PET/ceCT (κ = 0.96) and ceCT64 (κ = 0.84), although evaluation of the response at EOT was excellent only for FDG PET/ceCT (κ = 0.91). Conclusions Our study demonstrated satisfactory agreement between FDG PET/ceCT (κ = 0.96) and ceCT64 (κ = 0.84) in initial staging compared with the reference standard (P = 0.16). Response evaluation at EOT with FDG PET/ceCT (κ = 0.91) was superior compared with ceCT64 (κ = 0.307) (P < 0.001)

Similares en LA Referencia