Whole-Body [18F]FDG-PET/MRI vs. [18F]FDG-PET/CT in Malignant Melanoma
To assess the diagnostic performance of simultaneous whole-body 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared to [18F]FDG PET/x-ray computed tomography (CT) for detection of distant metastatic disease in patients with malignant melanoma.
We included patients with malignant melanoma who underwent a single injection [18F]FDG dual-imaging protocol that included whole-body PET/CT and subsequent whole-body PET/MRI for staging or restaging purposes in a prospective setting. Images from both modalities were analyzed by two rater teams for the presence of metastatic lesions. PET/CT–PET/MRI overall agreement as well as region-based accuracies, sensitivities (Se), and specificities (Sp) were computed.
Between July 2014 and December 2018, 22 patients were enrolled. Interrater agreement and overall accuracy (consensus reading) were 78.8 % (95 % CI 71–84.9) and 96.1 % (95 % CI 92.3–98) for PET/MRI and 78 % (70.2–84.3) and 97.4 % (95 % CI 93.7–98.9) for PET/CT, respectively (P = 0.42). PET/MRI reached a region-based Se of 89.1 % (95 % CI 79.4–94.5) and a Sp of 100 %, whereas PET/CT showed a region-based Se of 92.7 % (95 % CI 84–96.9) and a Sp of 100 % for the detection of metastatic disease in malignant melanoma.
Whole-body [18F]FDG-PET/MRI appears to be comparable to [18F]FDG-PET/CT for lesion detection in patients with malignant melanoma.
Key wordsMelanoma Distant metastasis [18F]FDG-PET Positron emission tomography Magnetic resonance imaging Computed tomography
The study was supported by the Jubilaeumsfonds of the Oesterreichische Nationalbank (OeNB) project number 16888.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
MEM has received speaker honoraria and research support from Siemens Healthineers, as well as speaker honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb.
- 4.Pflugfelder A, Kochs C, Blum A et al (2013) Malignant melanoma S3-guideline “diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of melanoma”. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 11:1–116Google Scholar
- 8.Giraudo C, Raderer M, Karanikas G et al (2016) 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance in lymphoma: comparison with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography and with the addition of magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging. Invest Radiol 5:163–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Muehe AM, Theruvath AJ, Lai L, Aghighi M, Quon A, Holdsworth SJ, Wang J, Luna-Fineman S, Marina N, Advani R, Rosenberg J, Daldrup-Link HE (2018) How to provide gadolinium-free PET/MR cancer staging of children and young adults in less than 1 h: the Stanford Approach. Mol Imaging Biol 20:324–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar