TY - JOUR
T1 - 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in brain tumours
T2 - the Western Australia positron emission tomography/cyclotron service experience
AU - McCarthy, Michael
AU - Yuan, Jinbo
AU - Campbell, A
AU - Lenzo, N P
AU - Butler-Henderson, K
PY - 2008/12
Y1 - 2008/12
N2 - (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scans in the first 49 patients referred with either possible brain tumour or brain tumour recurrence were reviewed. FDG-PET imaging was reported with reference to anatomical imaging. Based on the report the FDG study was classified as either positive or negative for the presence of tumour. Thirty-eight cases were included in the analysis, 21 having pathological data and 17 with diagnostic clinical follow up. Eleven were excluded, as they had inadequate follow-up data. Of the 21 cases with pathology, 18 were shown to have tumour. In this group there were five false-negative scans and two false-positive PET scans. Seventeen cases were assessed by clinical follow up, nine were considered to have been tumour. There were two false negatives with one false positive. The overall sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were 74, 73, 87 and 53% respectively. This is similar to figures previously quoted in published work. Despite relatively limited numbers, the utility of FDG PET imaging in our hands is similar to published reports. With a positive predictive value of 87%, a positive FDG study indicates a high likelihood that there is brain tumour present. A negative study does not exclude the presence of tumour.
AB - (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scans in the first 49 patients referred with either possible brain tumour or brain tumour recurrence were reviewed. FDG-PET imaging was reported with reference to anatomical imaging. Based on the report the FDG study was classified as either positive or negative for the presence of tumour. Thirty-eight cases were included in the analysis, 21 having pathological data and 17 with diagnostic clinical follow up. Eleven were excluded, as they had inadequate follow-up data. Of the 21 cases with pathology, 18 were shown to have tumour. In this group there were five false-negative scans and two false-positive PET scans. Seventeen cases were assessed by clinical follow up, nine were considered to have been tumour. There were two false negatives with one false positive. The overall sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values were 74, 73, 87 and 53% respectively. This is similar to figures previously quoted in published work. Despite relatively limited numbers, the utility of FDG PET imaging in our hands is similar to published reports. With a positive predictive value of 87%, a positive FDG study indicates a high likelihood that there is brain tumour present. A negative study does not exclude the presence of tumour.
KW - Adult
KW - Aged
KW - Brain Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging
KW - Cyclotrons
KW - False Negative Reactions
KW - False Positive Reactions
KW - Female
KW - Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
KW - Humans
KW - Male
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Positron-Emission Tomography/methods
KW - Radiopharmaceuticals
KW - Reproducibility of Results
KW - Nedlands
KW - Young Adult
U2 - 10.1111/j.1440-1673.2008.02019.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1440-1673.2008.02019.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 19178630
SN - 0004-8461
VL - 52
SP - 564
EP - 569
JO - Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology
JF - Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology
IS - 6
ER -