The Role of FDG-PET in the Initial Staging and Response Assessment of Anal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
- 695 Downloads
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the role of FDG-positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/computed tomography (CT) with conventional imaging in the detection of primary and nodal disease in anal cancer, and to assess the impact of PET or PET/CT on the management of anal cancer.
A systematic review of the literature was performed. Eligible studies included those comparing PET or PET/CT with conventional imaging in the staging of histologically confirmed anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), or studies that performed PET or PET/CT imaging to assess response following treatment.
Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. For the detection of primary disease, CT and PET had a sensitivity of 60 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 45.5–75.2) and 99 % (95 % CI 96–100), respectively. Compared with conventional imaging, PET upstaged 15 % (95 % CI 10–21) and downstaged 15 % (95 % CI 10–20) of nodal disease. This led to a change in nodal staging in 28 % of patients (95 % CI 18–38). When only studies performing contemporary PET/CT were considered, the rate of nodal upstaging was 21 % (95 % CI 13–30) and the TNM stage was altered in 41 % of patients. Following chemoradiotherapy, 78 % (95 % CI 65–88) of patients had a complete response on PET.
Compared with conventional imaging, PET or PET/CT alters the nodal status in a sufficient number of cases to justify its routine use in the staging of patients with anal SCC.
KeywordsPositive Predictive Value Sentinel Node Biopsy Conventional Imaging National Comprehensive Cancer Network National Comprehensive Cancer Network
The authors thank Dr. Christopher Oldmeadow for performing the statistical analysis.
- 6.Benson Al, Venook AP, Bekaii-Saab T, et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Anal carcinoma. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2014;(v2):ANAL-1 and ANAL-2.Google Scholar
- 24.Bartelink H, Roelofsen F, Eschwege F, et al. Concomitant radiotherapy and chemotherapy is superior to radiotherapy alone in the treatment of locally advanced anal cancer: results of a phase III randomized trial of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Radiotherapy and Gastrointestinal Cooperative Groups. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15(5):2040–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 28.Flam M, John M, Pajak TF, et al. Role of mitomycin in combination with fluorouracil and radiotherapy, and of salvage chemoradiation in the definitive nonsurgical treatment of epidermoid carcinoma of the anal canal: results of a phase III randomized intergroup study. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(9):2527–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.Mell LK, Schomas DA, Salama JK, et al. Association between bone marrow dosimetric parameters and acute hematologic toxicity in anal cancer patients treated with concurrent chemotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70(5):1431–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.Kachnic LA, Winter K, Myerson RJ, et al. RTOG 0529: a phase 2 evaluation of dose-painted intensity modulated radiation therapy in combination with 5-fluorouracil and mitomycin-C for the reduction of acute morbidity in carcinoma of the anal canal. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;86(1):27–33.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 39.James RD, Glynne-Jones R, Meadows HM, et al. Mitomycin or cisplatin chemoradiation with or without maintenance chemotherapy for treatment of squamous-cell carcinoma of the anus (ACT II): a randomised, phase 3, open-label, 2×2 factorial trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(6):516–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar