Added value of pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging of advanced gastric cancer: Comparison with contrast-enhanced MDCT

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the added clinical value of pretreatment 18 F-FDG PET/CT compared with conventional contrast-enhanced multidetector-row CT (CECT) alone for staging of advanced gastric cancer Materials and methods We studied 106 patients with locally advanced gastric cancer who underwent pretreatment CECT and 18 F-FDG PET/CT. Two experienced reviewers assessed the diagnostic performance of both CECT alone and the combination of CECT and 18 F-FDG PET/CT for the primary tumor, regional lymph node metastasis (N) and distant metastasis (M), rating their diagnostic confidence with a 5-point scoring system for each location. The two methods were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for histopathologic findings, imaging, and clinical follow-up as the reference standards. Results Among the 106 patients, 96 primary tumors (90.6%) were detected by CECT, while 101 (95.3%) were clearly identified by 18 F-FDG PET/CT (p = 0.074). Patient-based areas under the ROC curves for CECT alone versus the combination of CECT and 18 F-FDG PET/CT for diagnosis of N stage, peritoneal dissemination, liver metastasis, distant lymph node metastasis, bone metastasis, metastasis at other sites and overall M stage were 0.787 vs. 0.858 (p = 0.13), 0.866 vs. 0.878 (p = 0.31), 0.998 vs. 1.0 (p = 0.36), 0.744 vs. 0.865 (p = 0.049), 0.786 vs. 0.998 (p = 0.034), 0.944 vs. 0.984 (p = 0.34), and 0.889 vs. 0.912 (p = 0.21), respectively. The diagnostic performance of primary tumor detection and NM staging was not influenced by the histologic subtype. Conclusion Adding 18 F-FDG PET/CT to CECT provides better diagnostic accuracy for detection of distant lymph node metastasis and bone metastasis in patients with untreated advanced gastric cancer.