• Cancer · May 2013

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    Coregistered whole body magnetic resonance imaging-positron emission tomography (MRI-PET) versus PET-computed tomography plus brain MRI in staging resectable lung cancer: comparisons of clinical effectiveness in a randomized trial.

    • Chin A Yi, Kyung Soo Lee, Ho Yun Lee, Seonwoo Kim, O Jung Kwon, Hojoong Kim, Joon Young Choi, Byung-Tae Kim, Hye Sun Hwang, and Young Mog Shim.
    • Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
    • Cancer. 2013 May 15;119(10):1784-91.

    BackgroundThe objective of this study was to assess whether coregistered whole brain (WB) magnetic resonance imaging-positron emission tomography (MRI-PET) would increase the number of correctly upstaged patients compared with WB PET-computed tomography (PET-CT) plus dedicated brain MRI in patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsFrom January 2010 through November 2011, patients with NSCLC who had resectable disease based on conventional staging were assigned randomly either to coregistered MRI-PET or WB PET-CT plus brain MRI (ClinicalTrials.gov trial NCT01065415). The primary endpoint was correct upstaging (the identification of lesions with higher tumor, lymph node, or metastasis classification, verified with biopsy or other diagnostic test) to have the advantage of avoiding unnecessary thoracotomy, to determine appropriate treatment, and to accurately predict patient prognosis. The secondary endpoints were over staging and under staging compared with pathologic staging.ResultsLung cancer was correctly upstaged in 37 of 143 patients (25.9%) in the MRI-PET group and in 26 of 120 patients (21.7%) in the PET-CT plus brain MRI group (4.2% difference; 95% confidence interval, -6.1% to 14.5%; P = .426). Lung cancer was over staged in 26 of 143 patients (18.2%) in the MRI-PET group and in 7 of 120 patients (5.8%) in the PET-CT plus brain MRI group (12.4% difference; 95% confidence interval, 4.8%-20%; P = .003), whereas lung cancer was under staged in 18 of 143 patients (12.6%) and in 28 of 120 patients (23.3%), respectively (-10.7% difference; 95% confidence interval, -20.1% to -1.4%; P = .022).ConclusionsAlthough both staging tools allowed greater than 20% correct upstaging compared with conventional staging methods, coregistered MRI-PET did not appear to help identify significantly more correctly upstaged patients than PET-CT plus brain MRI in patients with NSCLC.Copyright © 2013 American Cancer Society.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…