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
- León, N.G. 16
- Delgado-Bolton, R.C. 23812
- Del Campo Del Val, L. 6
- Cabezas, B. 5
- Arranz, R. 6
- García, M. 5
- Cannata, J. 5
- González Ortega, S. 6
- Pérez Sáez, A.M. 4
- López-Botet, B. 9
- Rodríguez-Vigil, B. 10
- Mateo, M. 5
- Colletti, P.M. 11
- Rubello, D. 7
- Carreras, J.L. 8
-
1
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
info
-
2
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de La Rioja
info
-
3
Universidad de La Rioja
info
- 4 Department of Haematology, United Kingdom
-
5
Hospital Clínico San Carlos de Madrid
info
-
6
Hospital Universitario de la Princesa
info
- 7 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Imaging and Clinical Pathology, Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Rovigo, Italy
-
8
Nuclear Institute for Agriculture and Biology
info
-
9
Fundación Jiménez Díaz
info
-
10
Hospital Txagorritxu
info
-
11
University of Southern California
info
-
12
Hospital San Pedro
info
ISSN: 0363-9762
Año de publicación: 2017
Volumen: 42
Número: 8
Páginas: 595-602
Tipo: Artículo
Otras publicaciones en: Clinical Nuclear Medicine
Resumen
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). © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.