Screening for cancer with PET and PET/CT:: Potential and limitations

被引:0
|
作者
Schoder, Heiko
Gonen, Mithat
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Radiol & Nucl Med, New York, NY 10021 USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Biostat & Epidemiol, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
cancer screening; PET; PET/CT; POSITRON-EMISSION-TOMOGRAPHY; BODY FDG-PET; CELL LUNG-CANCER; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; BREAST-CANCER; RADIATION-EXPOSURE; THYROID-NODULES; ACTION PROJECT; CLINICAL-SIGNIFICANCE; EXTRACOLONIC FINDINGS;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Screening for cancer remains a very emotional and hotly debated issue in contemporary medical practice. An analysis of published data reveals a multitude of opinions based on a limited amount of reliable data. Even for breast cancer screening, which is now widely practiced in the United States and many European countries, there is continuing controversy regarding the appropriate age limits for screening mammography and, in fact, concerning the value of mammography itself. Similarly, there is no agreement as to whether screening for lung or prostate cancer is meaningful as currently practiced. Recommendations and decisions regarding cancer screening should be based on reliable data, not good intention, assumptions, or speculation. Therefore, we first explain the underlying principles and premises of screening and then briefly discuss current controversies regarding screening for breast, prostate, and lung cancers. Recently, some authors advocated CT, PET, or PET/CT for whole-body screening without support from reliable data. We discuss the potential financial, legal, and radiation safety implications associated with whole-body CT or PET cancer screening. We conclude from the available data that neither CT nor PET/CT cancer screening is currently warranted. Far from providing a desirable binary answer (presence of absence of cancer), in nonselected populations the procedures frequently yield equivocal or indeterminate findings that require further evaluation, with associated costs and potential complications. The clinical and statistical relevance of occasionally detected cancers is likely too low to justify population-wide screening efforts with these 2 imaging modalities. Ultimately, the true utility, or lack thereof, of PET and PET/CT for cancer screening can be assessed only in a prospective randomized trial. Because of prohibitive costs and the required length of follow-up, it is unlikely that such a trial will ever be conducted. Rather than spending time and resources on screening studies, medical practitioners should continue using whole-body PET/CT for diagnosing, staging, and restaging cancer and for monitoring treatment effects. Researchers should also investigate the utility of whole-body PET/CT for the surveillance of selected groups of patients who have cancer, who have completed curative treatment, but who remain at high risk for recurrent disease.
引用
收藏
页码:4S / 18S
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison of CT, PET, and PET/CT for Staging of Patients with Indolent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma
    Fueger, Barbara J.
    Yeom, Kristen
    Czernin, Johannes
    Sayre, James W.
    Phelps, Michael E.
    Allen-Auerbach, Martin S.
    MOLECULAR IMAGING AND BIOLOGY, 2009, 11 (04) : 269 - 274
  • [42] PET Imaging for response assessment in lymphoma:: Potential and limitations
    Schoder, Heiko
    Moskowitz, Craig
    RADIOLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2008, 46 (02) : 225 - 241
  • [43] Clinical Implication of PET/MR Imaging in Preoperative Esophageal Cancer Staging: Comparison with PET/CT, Endoscopic Ultrasonography, and CT
    Lee, Geewon
    Hoseok, I
    Kim, Seong-Jang
    Jeong, Yeon Joo
    Kim, In Joo
    Pak, Kyoungjune
    Park, Do Yun
    Kim, Gwang Ha
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2014, 55 (08) : 1242 - 1247
  • [44] PET/CT and MRI in the imaging assessment of cervical cancer
    Kusmirek, Joanna
    Robbins, Jessica
    Allen, Hailey
    Barroilhet, Lisa
    Anderson, Bethany
    Sadowski, Elizabeth A.
    ABDOMINAL IMAGING, 2015, 40 (07): : 2486 - 2511
  • [45] Recurrent and metastatic breast cancer PET, PET/CT, PET/MRI: FDG and new biomarkers
    Gaeta, C. M.
    Vercher-Conejero, J. L.
    Sher, A. C.
    Kohan, A.
    Rubbert, C.
    Avril, N.
    QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2013, 57 (04) : 352 - 366
  • [46] Is It Time to Introduce PET/CT in Rectal Cancer Guidelines?
    Maffione, Anna Margherita
    Montesi, Giampaolo
    Caroli, Paola
    Colletti, Patrick M.
    Rubello, Domenico
    Matteucci, Federica
    CLINICAL NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2020, 45 (08) : 611 - 617
  • [47] Conventional Cancer Screening versus PET/CT in Dermatomyositis/Polymyositis
    Selva-O'Callaghan, Albert
    Grau, Josep M.
    Gamez-Cenzano, Cristina
    Vidaller-Palacin, Antonio
    Martinez-Gomez, Xavier
    Trallero-Araguas, Ernesto
    Andia-Navarro, Eduard
    Vilardell-Tarres, Miquel
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2010, 123 (06) : 558 - 562
  • [48] Utility of PET-CT versus CT in staging colorectal cancer
    Hernandez-Oliver, Daniela Z.
    Serna-Macias, Jose A.
    GACETA MEXICANA DE ONCOLOGIA, 2021, 20 (04): : 134 - 138
  • [49] PET/CT Imaging of Thyroid Cancer
    Mosci, Camila
    Iagaru, Andrei
    CLINICAL NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2011, 36 (12) : E180 - E185
  • [50] Progress and Future Trends in PET/CT and PET/MRI Molecular Imaging Approaches for Breast Cancer
    Ming, Yue
    Wu, Nan
    Qian, Tianyi
    Li, Xiao
    Wan, David Q.
    Li, Caiying
    Li, Yalun
    Wu, Zhihong
    Wang, Xiang
    Liu, Jiaqi
    Wu, Ning
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2020, 10