Positron emission tomography (PET) has become an important diagnostic modality for radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians. This article provides a brief overview of practical information about the indications, performance, interpretation, and potential pitfalls of PET imaging.
Dr. Kipper
is the Physician Coordinator for Nuclear Imaging and PET in the
Department of PET and Nuclear Medicine Services, Radiology
Medical Group, San Diego, CA.
Positron emission tomography (PET) has become an important
diagnostic modality for radiologists and nuclear medicine
physicians. Developed nearly 3 decades ago for research purposes,
it is now recognized as a powerful clinical tool in the
investigation of oncologic patients. Efficacy has also been shown
for selected neurologic and cardiac disorders (Figure 1). The
purpose of this brief overview is to provide the diagnostic imager
with practical information about the indications, performance,
interpretation, and potential pitfalls of PET imaging. A limited
number of references are provided for the reader interested in
more-in-depth reviews of specific topics.
Indications
More than 90% of PET studies are performed for cancer in the
clinical arena. The basis for in vivo imaging of F-18
fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) distribution is the enhanced glycolysis of
tumor cells, recognized more than 60 years ago. Uptake and
concentration of glucose (and FDG) are facilitated by two factors:
increased numbers of glucose transporters on malignant cell
surfaces and a block in the intracellular glycolytic pathway due to
relative glucose-6-phosphatase deficiency. Ultimately, images
reflect the relative state of glycolysis that is increased in tumor
cells. Tumors with the highest metabolic rates demonstrate the
greatest FDG accumulation. Allowing for variability between tumor
types, as well as potential differences in metabolic activity for a
specific tumor, generalizations are possible as a guide in
selecting appropriate patients for study.
Lung cancer
Positron emission tomography is extremely valuable for the
diagnosing, staging, evaluating for recurrence, and, possibly,
monitoring of response to treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer
(Figure 2). It has demonstrated >90% sensitivity and specificity
in characterizing solitary pulmonary nodules as benign or malignant
based upon FDG concentration (Figure 3). This activity can be
characterized by visual/qualitative assessment (eg, compared with
normal mediastinal activity) or semi-quantitatively by calculating
a standardized uptake value (SUV). The SUV is a numerical
representation of the concentration of FDG in a focus/lesion
compared with body activity. Most PET imagers use a cutoff SUV of 2
to 2.5 to separate a benign from malignant focus. Small-cell lung
cancer is nearly always disseminated by the time of diagnosis; and
therefore the use of PET in this disease is limited to select
patients to answer specific questions. Major advantages of PET over
conventional, anatomic-based modalities are its ability to
characterize mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes as benign or
malignant (not relying on size or shape of the node with the
well-recognized inaccuracy of these criteria), whole-body survey
capability (including accurate adrenal evaluation), and
differentiation of post-therapy changes from those of recurrent
disease. Caution must be exercised with bronchoalveolar carcinoma,
and most authors report reduced sensitivity (likely due to lower
metabolic rate).
1
Colorectal cancer
Positron emission tomography imaging is utilized for staging and
for assessing recurrence of colorectal cancer (Figure 4). There is
preliminary data to suggest a potential role for monitoring
response to therapy.
2
Longitudinal surveillance is often performed with measurements of
carcinoembyonic antigen (CEA) levels; however, the sensitivity of
this test is only 60%, and localization of lesion(s) is not
possible. The initial imaging study is appropriately a computed
tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen/pelvis, but again, the
sensitivity of CT is less than whole-body PET. Many oncologists now
utilize PET at the first sign of a rising CEA and certainly in
cases in which the CT is negative. Based upon PET's ability to
characterize the metabolic status of a mass, it is recommended to
differentiate post-therapy change (eg, scar, radiation fibrosis)
from active tumor, which is difficult at best with CT and MR. The
importance of early identification of tumor recurrence is twofold:
first, solitary metastases may be amenable to curative surgery, and
second, multiple sites of recurrence will spare the patient an
unsuccessful curative-intent operation and will redirect therapy
(Figure 5).
Lymphoma
Both Hodgkin's disease (HD) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) are
FDG-avid. Many reports have documented the high accuracy of PET in
nodal, extranodal, and bone marrow staging of lymphomas (Figure 6).
3
It also appears that the degree of FDG uptake may have prognostic
significance. Presently, conventional staging is most often
performed with contrast-enhanced CT of the neck, chest, abdomen,
and pelvis; gallium whole body imaging; and bone marrow aspiration.
Although there are studies to suggest that a PET scan is more
accurate than the combination of all of the above,
4
a reasonable recommendation is to use PET as a complementary
examination in conjunction with CT (and possibly bone marrow
biopsy), while eliminating the gallium scan. After PET imaging, up
to 15% to 20% of patients will be restaged.
5
Note that low-grade lymphomas may show diminished FDG accumulation
due to reduced metabolic rate/low proliferative activity. Positron
emission tomography is also extremely accurate for identifying
recurrence and monitoring response to therapy. A pooled series in
262 patients for monitoring response showed a positive predictive
value of 88% and a negative predictive value of 94%.
6
Melanoma
Positron emission tomography can contribute to the evaluation
and management of melanoma patients in several areas: staging,
identifying recurrence, monitoring therapy, and assessing a patient
for curative-intent surgery after the discovery of a metastasis.
Most PET whole-body surveys extend from mid-thigh to mid-nose;
however, because of the potential involvement of any bodily site
with melanoma, images should include the top of the skull to the
bottom of the feet. Performing the study with attenuation
correction may take up to 2 hours. Alternatives include elimination
of attenuation correction or "splitting the body," acquiring
attenuation corrected images above the inguinal regions with
noncorrected images below. The usual, high metabolic rate of
melanoma contributes to the excellent sensitivity (83%) and
specificity (91%) for PET in this tumor (Figure 7).
Head and neck
Cancers of the head and neck, as well as therapy for these
tumors, may result in high levels of morbidity. Also, it is not
uncommon to identify cancer in a cervical node and be unable to
find the primary site with conventional imaging studies or
endoscopic examination. Positron emission tomography may be helpful
in locating the primary site, staging, detecting recurrence, and
monitoring therapeutic response. The accuracy (including
sensitivity and specificity) of PET is significantly better than CT
for diagnosis, staging, and monitoring response. However, caution
must be used in interpreting PET studies in the patient following
radiation therapy.
7
Many authors feel that increased FDG accumulation (ie,
hypermetabolic activity) may persist for months following
radiation.
8
Until more data are available, it is advisable to delay PET
scanning for 6 months, if possible, in radiated patients with head
and neck cancer. Most other tumors will likely require less time,
but, again, these data are still preliminary. False-positive
results may also occur in reactive nodes, reducing test
specificity.
Breast cancer
As of October 1, 2002, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services has initiated reimbursement for PET in breast cancer,
including staging, restaging, and monitoring therapy. Screening
will remain the purview of mammography, with PET used in patients
with dense breasts or implants. Axillary lymph node staging will
continue to be done by sentinel node sampling after
lymphoscintigraphy. Lymphoscintigraphy is not, however, helpful for
internal mammary nodes that are suspect in up to 20% of breast
cancer patients, especially those with medial lesions. Staging and
restaging may result in equivocal findings, necessitating a
whole-body PET survey. There are data to support a PET study to
replace the standard battery of conventional examinations for
staging (eg, bone scan, radiographs, CT, MRI, ultrasound, biopsy).
Monitoring therapy may be especially important in breast cancer
patients because of the toxicity of chemotherapeutic agents and the
availability of alternate drugs. Positron emission tomography is
uniquely positioned to provide this information based upon the
ability to characterize the metabolic response of tumor sites.
These responses antedate anatomic changes by weeks to months.
Other tumors
This broad category includes tumors that can be subdivided into
three groups: category 1--PET efficacy well documented; category
2--PET recommended for problem solving and in specific patients;
and category 3--PET rarely indicated.
Category 1
Conditions in which PET has been shown to be effective include
esophageal carcinoma and brain tumors. For patients with esophageal
cancer, PET is the best way to determine metastatic spread, while
staging of the primary site is performed with anatomic imaging
(Figure 8). A positive PET study at distant sites may obviate
unnecessary surgery. Applications of PET in brain tumor patients
include differential diagnosis between recurrence (increased FDG
uptake) and radiation necrosis (reduced FDG uptake), identification
of potential biopsy site, monitoring response to treatment, and
grading the malignancy (ie, the greater the FDG uptake, the higher
the tumor grade) (Figure 9). Note that FDG does not typically
accumulate in low-grade gliomas.
Category 2
Positron emission tomography is recommended for problem solving
and in specific patients for almost all other tumor types. An
exhaustive review of these tumors is beyond the scope of this brief
report; however, based on literature series, anecdotal data, and
personal experience/communication, many patients with cervical,
9
pancreatic,
10
testicular,
11
renal,
12
and ovarian cancer
13
are excellent candidates for whole-body PET. Although there are few
reported cases, PET appears to be helpful in certain
musculoskeletal tumors and in thyroid cancer patients with a
negative I-131 whole-body survey and elevated serum thyroglobulin
level. In problem solving applications, some patients presenting
with an unknown primary cancer, and some with rising tumor markers
and a negative standard work-up, may have positive PET
findings.
Category 3
Positron emission tomography is rarely indicated in most
patients with prostate cancer, neuroendocrine tumors,
hepatocellular carcinoma, and, most likely, bronchoalveolar lung
cancers. While research is ongoing to identify more efficacious
radiopharmaceuticals for these malignancies and some authors have
reported positive results with FDG, PET is recommended to answer
very specific questions.
In most departments, >90% of all PET work is performed to
evaluate cancer. However, there is clear evidence of the value of
FDG PET in determining myocardial viability
14,15
and in the evaluation of dementia and seizures.
16
Again, the reader is directed to the references for additional
information.
Performance
A helpful, practical way to understand the performance of a
whole-body PET survey is to follow the course of a typical patient
from request to report, highlighting areas of importance as well as
ongoing debate. Since the overwhelming majority of PET studies are
ordered on outpatients, we will assume that our patient is in this
group.
I. Request received
There are three major reasons to review the request prior to
scheduling. First, determine whether PET scanning is appropriate.
Oftentimes the tumor type is not FDG-avid (ie, prostate) or an
anatomical study is preferable (eg, primary site evaluation for
esophageal cancer). Second, assess the urgency of the request. Many
times, treatment decisions are made based upon the results of the
PET scan. This is especially true for patients initiating or
undergoing potentially toxic chemotherapy. Third, if there are
authorization or other insurance issues, the staff should begin to
address these immediately. Support personnel must document whom
they speak with, date and time of contact, and any potential
problems with getting approval for the study. Additionally, the
request form should indicate where and when correlative studies
were performed so that these may be requested, identify diabetic or
claustrophobic patients, and list all physicians who should receive
a report.
II. Patient contact
Prior to the study, the patient should be contacted (and the
contact should be documented) for an explanation of the basics of
the test (ie, safety, duration, restrictions, etc.) and to enlist
his or her help in securing all prior correlative studies conducted
at other medical facilities. Most hospitals and imaging facilities
are willing to loan the patient his or her films for comparison. A
patient contact prior to the study can be invaluable in allaying
patient anxiety and in dramatically reducing the number of
"no-shows." Additional items to cover with the patient include
fasting for 6 or more hours prior to the study (fluid hydration is
fine), limitation of physical activity for the day before the
examination (to reduce muscular uptake), documentation of recent
surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation therapy, and directions to the
center. A patient who is lost or is significantly late can have a
major impact on the schedule.
III. Day of the study
The patient should have fasted for 6 or more hours; should wear
warm, comfortable clothes; and should arrive at least 30 minutes
prior to the scheduled time of the FDG injection. In these 30
minutes, the patient should complete forms, submit his or her
outside studies, be taken to the uptake room, and have a blood
glucose level performed. Most centers use an upper limit of 150 to
200 mg/dL. Elevated glucose levels compete with injected FDG,
potentially affecting the sensitivity and quality of the scan.
A patient with a significantly elevated glucose level is best
rescheduled. It is not recommended to administer insulin, since
this drives FDG into the muscles. The management of a patient with
known diabetes is left to the discretion of the interpreting
physician, often after consultation with the patient's doctor
and/or the patient. General guidelines: diet-controlled diabetics
can be treated as nondiabetics (ie, fast for 6 hours); and oral
agent-controlled diabetics may be placed into an early-morning time
slot and instructed to withhold their pills and food until after
their scan. Insulin-dependent diabetics can check their own glucose
level prior to the scan (morning study preferred) and either
withhold insulin until after their examination or modify/reduce
their insulin dose (eg, a half dose) based upon anticipated study
completion time and prior history of hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia.
The patient should bring (and the center should supply) foods to
counter hypoglycemia. An insulin-dependent diabetic with a glucose
level <100 mg/dL prior to the study should be watched carefully
and questioned for any signs or symptoms of hypoglycemia (eg,
sweating, nausea, tachycardia, disorientation, etc.).
The dose of FDG is typically 10 to 15 mCi in adults and 0.14
mCi/Kg in children. This may vary depending on the type of study
(eg, may be less for myocardial viability or dedicated brain
examinations), patient size, and even which camera is used. Based
upon system sensitivity, the dose could be less--it is recommended
that the manufacturer be consulted prior to initiation of studies.
The uptake phase (time from injection until time of imaging) should
take place in a quiet room with minimal conversation or activity.
Typically, uptake is approximately 1 hour; however, some data are
accumulating to indicate that in selected tumors a longer time
frame may be better (eg, breast = 1.5 to 2 hours).
Imaging
Most whole-body studies take approximately 45 to 60 minutes;
less time for shorter patients, more time for taller patients and
for melanoma studies that extend from the top of the skull to the
bottom of the feet. A typical whole-body survey for cancer begins
at mid-thigh level and goes to mid-face. Studies may be performed
with or without attenuation correction (ie, transmission scan) and
at this time the majority of centers perform both emission and
transmission scans.
17
Debatable issues
Bladder catheterization
F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose is excreted into the bladder, and may
obscure pelvic findings. Voiding prior to initiation of scanning,
starting at the lower body first, and reconstruction in three
planes (especially the sagittal) all can be helpful in assessing
the perivesicular region. Also, a dedicated pelvic stop immediately
after (or before) the whole-body study can be helpful. In some
patients, none of these practical steps are successful. Some
authors recommend bladder catheterization in all patients,
including administration of furosemide before imaging. Others
instill sterile saline to "dilute out" the radioactive urine. While
we have not found this necessary as a routine, consideration should
be given to catheterization in patients with known or suspected
pelvic malignancies (ie, gynecologic tumors or colorectal
cancers).
Laxatives
Most centers do not administer laxatives for bowel cleansing,
accepting some bowel activity as a normal pattern. A word of
caution--variability in distribution, intensity, and shape of bowel
activity is the rule rather than the exception, including
differences in the same patient from scan to scan. A tubular
distribution, often confirmed by multiplane analysis, is often
reassuring, while a more focal site mandates careful correlation
with CT.
Sedation/muscle relaxants
We have not found muscle relaxants necessary for routine
studies. However, for extremely claustrophobic patients, we have
found 0.5 to 1.0 mg of Xanax to be very helpful. Claustrophobic
patients can often be reassured by a visit to the scanner on a day
prior to their study for viewing or even a "trial run." Muscle
relaxants are rarely necessary but if the patient truly feels he or
she needs one, diazepam (5 to 10 mg) may be effective.
Transportation home is mandatory for any patient receiving
sedatives or relaxants.
Interpretation
The basics of interpretation include knowledge of the normal
distribution of FDG (eg, brain, thyroid, heart, renal collecting
systems, stomach, bowel, bladder, etc.), benign variants (eg,
muscular uptake, injection sites, recent wounds, inflammatory
sites, etc.), and the differences between attenuation-corrected and
noncorrected images. Next, comparison with anatomic imaging studies
is critical. The corresponding findings on CT or MR will often
confirm the PET impression, or if incongruent, suggest an
appropriate clinical strategy (ie, further testing versus
observation). There is no substitute for experience in reading PET
studies, and many fine training opportunities are available. Choose
a center that offers didactic "read-out" sessions as well as an
opportunity to access their case files for maximimal exposure.
Actual interpretation may be based upon visual assessment
(qualitative) or may include semi-quantitative measurements, of the
SUV, which is the ratio of tumor tracer concentration to the
distributed body concentration. However, benign, generally very
active inflammatory processes may show SUVs >2, and
low-metabolic-rate tumors may demonstrate SUVs <2. There are
requirements for reliable SUV determination; two important
variables are proper attenuation correction (therefore, one should
not perform SUV measurements on noncorrected data) and calculation
based upon a standardized time (ie, 60 minutes). For visual
interpretation of the chest, comparison is made to normal
mediastinal uptake.
Potential pitfalls
The performance and interpretation of a PET study, as in all
imaging tests, are subject to error. Most errors can be explained
by careful review of all aspects of the examination. False-positive
findings may be due to nontumorous processes that actively
concentrate FDG, such as active inflammation, granulomatous
disease, muscular uptake, normal patient variation (eg, bowel,
thyroid, GU tract), radiation therapy sites, marrow activation
following chemotherapy or with anemia, bone/joint uptake secondary
to fracture or the arthritides, and reactive lymph nodes (Figure
10). Uptake secondary to postradiation changes may persist for
months, while uptake due to che-motherapy generally lasts for
weeks. An extensive listing by body regions is referenced.
18
False-negative studies may occur in patients with hyperglycemia,
lesions below the level of resolution of current PET cameras (1
cm), microscopic nodal disease, low-metabolic rate tumors (eg,
low-grade glioma), juxtaposition to normal FDG-avid regions, or
sole reliance on an arbitrary SUV cut-off value.
Conclusion
The unique information provided by PET is a remarkable addition
to our diagnostic imaging armamentarium. However, the multiple
factors that must come together to produce a successful study
mandate careful attention to detail and a clear understanding of
each aspect of the examination, from receipt of the request to
completion of scan review.
AR