Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Diagnostic accuracy of sequential co-registered PET+MR in comparison to PET/CT in local thoracic staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma


Martini, Katharina; Meier, Andreas; Opitz, Isabelle; Weder, Walter; Veit-Haibach, Patrick; Stahel, Rolf A; Frauenfelder, Thomas (2016). Diagnostic accuracy of sequential co-registered PET+MR in comparison to PET/CT in local thoracic staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Lung Cancer, 94:40-45.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of sequential co-registered PET+MR (PET+MR) for local staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) compared to PET/CT.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective clinical trial 34 consecutive patients (median age 66 years; range 40-79 years; 1 female, 33 male) with known MPM, who underwent PET/CT and PET+MR exams for either staging or re-staging/follow-up were evaluated. Imaging was conducted using a tri-modality PET/CT-MR set-up (Discovery PET/CT 690, 3T Discovery MR 750w, both GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI, USA). In 26 cases histopathology served as standard of reference. Two independent readers evaluated images for T and N stage, confidence level (sure to unsure; 1-3) and subjective overall image quality (very good to non-diagnostic; 1-4). Inter-observer agreement of T and N stages (Cohen's kappa) and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between PET/CT vs. PET+MR was calculated.
RESULTS: Inter observer agreement for evaluation of T and N Stage in PET/CT images was excellent (k=0.844 and k=0.824, respectively), whereas PET+MR imaging showed substantial agreement in T and N stage (k=0.729 and k=0.691, respectively). The ICC of PET/CT vs. PET+MR for evaluation of both, T and N Stage, was excellent (ICC=0.951 and ICC=0.93, respectively). Diagnostic confidence was scored significantly higher in PET+MR compared to PET/CT (mean score=1.66 and 1.93, respectively; p=0.004). Image quality was diagnostic for all image series. Comparing pT and pN stage vs cT and cN stage (n=26 cases), both imaging modalities showed excellent agreement for T stage (ICCPET+MR=0.888 vs. ICCPET/CT=0.853, respectively) and substantial to moderate agreement for N stage (ICCPET+MR=0.683 vs. ICC=0.595PET/CT, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that diagnostic accuracy of PET+MR is comparable to PET/CT for local staging of MPM, whereas radiologists felt significantly more confident staging PET+MR compared to PET/CT images (p=0003), using dedicated sequences.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of sequential co-registered PET+MR (PET+MR) for local staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) compared to PET/CT.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective clinical trial 34 consecutive patients (median age 66 years; range 40-79 years; 1 female, 33 male) with known MPM, who underwent PET/CT and PET+MR exams for either staging or re-staging/follow-up were evaluated. Imaging was conducted using a tri-modality PET/CT-MR set-up (Discovery PET/CT 690, 3T Discovery MR 750w, both GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI, USA). In 26 cases histopathology served as standard of reference. Two independent readers evaluated images for T and N stage, confidence level (sure to unsure; 1-3) and subjective overall image quality (very good to non-diagnostic; 1-4). Inter-observer agreement of T and N stages (Cohen's kappa) and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between PET/CT vs. PET+MR was calculated.
RESULTS: Inter observer agreement for evaluation of T and N Stage in PET/CT images was excellent (k=0.844 and k=0.824, respectively), whereas PET+MR imaging showed substantial agreement in T and N stage (k=0.729 and k=0.691, respectively). The ICC of PET/CT vs. PET+MR for evaluation of both, T and N Stage, was excellent (ICC=0.951 and ICC=0.93, respectively). Diagnostic confidence was scored significantly higher in PET+MR compared to PET/CT (mean score=1.66 and 1.93, respectively; p=0.004). Image quality was diagnostic for all image series. Comparing pT and pN stage vs cT and cN stage (n=26 cases), both imaging modalities showed excellent agreement for T stage (ICCPET+MR=0.888 vs. ICCPET/CT=0.853, respectively) and substantial to moderate agreement for N stage (ICCPET+MR=0.683 vs. ICC=0.595PET/CT, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that diagnostic accuracy of PET+MR is comparable to PET/CT for local staging of MPM, whereas radiologists felt significantly more confident staging PET+MR compared to PET/CT images (p=0003), using dedicated sequences.

Statistics

Citations

3 citations in Web of Science®
3 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

0 downloads since deposited on 22 Mar 2016
0 downloads since 12 months

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology
04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Nuclear Medicine
04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Oncology
04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Thoracic Surgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Uncontrolled Keywords:Diagnostic confidence; Malignant pleural mesothelioma; PET/CT; PET/MR; TN staging
Language:English
Date:April 2016
Deposited On:22 Mar 2016 16:19
Last Modified:08 Dec 2017 19:17
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0169-5002
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.01.017
PubMed ID:26973205

Download