Role of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Preoperative Assessment of Carcinoma Endometrium-a Retrospective Analysis.

Rohini Kulkarni, Rani Akhil Bhat, Vibhawari Dhakharia, Kumar Kallur, Aparna Gangoli
Author Information
  1. Rohini Kulkarni: 1Department of Gynaecological Oncology, HCG hospital, Bengaluru, India.
  2. Rani Akhil Bhat: 2Department of Gynaecological Oncology, HCG Hospital, Bengaluru, India.
  3. Vibhawari Dhakharia: 2Department of Gynaecological Oncology, HCG Hospital, Bengaluru, India.
  4. Kumar Kallur: 3Radiodiagnosis and Nuclear Medicine, HCG hospital, Bengaluru, India.
  5. Aparna Gangoli: 4Department of Onco - Pathology, HCG hospital, Bengaluru, India.

Abstract

PET/CT has made significant inroads into routine oncological practice in recent times. In our study, we aim to determine its value in preoperative assessment of endometrial carcinoma. A retrospective study between January 2011 and March 2016 was conducted; we included all cases of carcinoma endometrium with a preoperative PET/CT scan. PET/CT images were analyzed and correlated with histological findings after surgical staging. A total of 46 cases were analyzed, mean age was 59.8 years, BMI 30.8 kg/m, and most common histology endometrioid type (69.5%). We correlated PET/CT findings with histopathology as reference standard. PET/CT had a sensitivity of 40%, moderate specificity (75%) and accuracy (71.7%), good NPV (91.2%), but poor PPV (16.7%) for lymph node involvement. A total of 10 (21.7%) cases were detected to have distant metabolically active lesions on PET/CT, seven out of these were positive for malignancy. And 90% of them were either non-endometrioid type or grade two and higher. We found that SUV of primary tumor was significantly higher in patients with deep myometrial invasion (���=���0.018), and high-risk histological type of tumor (���=���0.022), though not statistically significant when lymph nodal involvement (���=���0.9), cervical involvement (���=���0.56), or histological grade (���=���0.84) were considered. Sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT in staging endometrial cancer is not high enough to reliably tailor lymphadenectomy. Although SUV of the primary tumor was significantly higher in patients with deep myometrial invasion and high-risk histological type, it's usefulness in classifying patients into predefined risk groups seems to be limited. However, it is useful in detecting distant metastasis especially in high-grade and non-endometrioid type of tumors. Thus, implementation of PET/CT as a surrogate for surgical staging of endometrial cancer remains enigmatic and is open to further research.

Keywords

References

  1. J Nucl Med. 2015 Aug;56(8):1191-8 [PMID: 26045311]
  2. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015 Jul;42(8):1268-75 [PMID: 25833351]
  3. Nuklearmedizin. 2011;50(5):204-13 [PMID: 21727990]
  4. J Nucl Med. 2016 Jun;57(6):879-85 [PMID: 26823564]
  5. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Apr;43(4):695-706 [PMID: 26519292]
  6. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Dec 3;100(23):1707-16 [PMID: 19033573]
  7. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jun;52(2):210-4 [PMID: 23915853]
  8. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2009 Jul-Aug;33(4):601-8 [PMID: 19638859]
  9. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2013;14(2):977-80 [PMID: 23621271]
  10. Mol Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct;5(4):467-474 [PMID: 27703679]
  11. Eur Radiol. 2009 Jun;19(6):1529-36 [PMID: 19184037]
  12. Ann Oncol. 2012 Oct;23 Suppl 7:vii27-32 [PMID: 22997451]
  13. Lancet. 2009 Jan 10;373(9658):125-36 [PMID: 19070889]
  14. Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Feb;128(2):300-8 [PMID: 23200916]
  15. Ann Nucl Med. 2016 Feb;30(2):104-13 [PMID: 26546334]
  16. Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Feb;128(2):397-404 [PMID: 23107613]
  17. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009 May;105(2):109 [PMID: 19345353]
  18. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 Jan;26(1):2-30 [PMID: 26645990]
  19. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2012 Jul;83(1):84-98 [PMID: 22245509]
  20. Gynecol Oncol. 2013 May;129(2):298-303 [PMID: 23376805]
  21. Acta Radiol. 1995 May;36(3):248-53 [PMID: 7742116]
  22. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2014 Jul;28(5):721-39 [PMID: 24852891]
  23. Ann Oncol. 2013 Oct;24 Suppl 6:vi33-8 [PMID: 24078661]
  24. Cancer Imaging. 2013 Jul 22;13(3):314-22 [PMID: 23876490]
  25. Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Aug;130(2):306-11 [PMID: 23707673]
  26. Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Aug;106(2):413-25 [PMID: 16055605]
  27. Clin Nucl Med. 2015 Oct;40(10):780-5 [PMID: 26053711]
  28. Eur J Radiol. 2012 Nov;81(11):3511-7 [PMID: 22305013]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0PET/CTtype���=���0histologicalendometrialcarcinomacasesstaging7%involvementhighertumorpatientssignificantstudypreoperativeanalyzedcorrelatedfindingssurgicaltotalspecificitylymphdistantnon-endometrioidgradeSUVprimarysignificantlydeepmyometrialinvasionhigh-riskcancerPositronmadeinroadsroutineoncologicalpracticerecenttimesaimdeterminevalueassessmentretrospectiveJanuary2011March2016conductedincludedendometriumscanimages46meanage598 yearsBMI308 kg/mcommonhistologyendometrioid695%histopathologyreferencestandardsensitivity40%moderate75%accuracy71goodNPV912%poorPPV16node1021detectedmetabolicallyactivelesionssevenpositivemalignancy90%eithertwofound018022thoughstatisticallynodal9cervical5684consideredSensitivityhighenoughreliablytailorlymphadenectomyAlthoughusefulnessclassifyingpredefinedriskgroupsseemslimitedHoweverusefuldetectingmetastasisespeciallyhigh-gradetumorsThusimplementationsurrogateremainsenigmaticopenresearchRoleEmissionTomography/ComputedTomographyPreoperativeAssessmentCarcinomaEndometrium-aRetrospectiveAnalysisEndometrialLymphadenectomyemissiontomography/computedtomography

Similar Articles

Cited By (3)