Application of FDG-PET for Detection of Malignant Lesions in Patients with Elevated Blood Tumor Markers but Without a History of Malignancy

Hong-Wei Zhan,Wei Xu,Xiao-Juan Ye,Chun-Lei Zhao,Hong Zhang,Jing Li,Qiong Yao,Li-Jun Zhang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr_00000181
IF: 3.423
2009-01-01
Molecular Medicine Reports
Abstract:The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical application of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging for the detection of malignant lesions. A total of 132 patients with increased levels of blood tumor markers but without a prior history of malignancy were examined. The results of FDG-PET and conventional work-up (CWU) including computed tomography (CT), ultrasonography, radionuclide bone scintigraphy and endoscopy were compared. The final diagnosis was based on pathological evidence, other medical imaging results and a follow-up of at least 6 months. There were 61 patients with malignant lesions and 71 without (benign lesions, n=35; healthy individuals, n=36). The average number of elevated tumor markers and the average increase in these tumor markers were greater in the malignant group than in the non-malignant group. FDG-PET imaging revealed that the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the major lesion in patients with malignant (n=61) and benign (n=35) tumors was not significantly related to increased levels of tumor markers (r=0.10, p<0.05). In patients with malignant lesions and an SUVmax ≥3.0, the diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of FDG-PET were 95.1, 83.1, 88.6, 82.9 and 95.2%, respectively. CWU identified 61 (100%) true-positive patients. No statistically significant differences in sensitivity were observed between the results of FDG-PET and CWU (p>0.05). In 36 healthy subjects without abnormal CWU findings, no abnormal FDG accumulation was revealed by FDG-PET imaging. In conclusion, FDG-PET imaging is a valuable tool for the detection of malignant lesions in patients with increased levels of blood tumor markers but without a history of malignancy. It is therefore reasonable to apply FDG-PET imaging in situations in which the results of CWU are inconclusive, or when patients wish to limit the number of examinations they must undergo.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?