title: The accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration, integrated positron emission tomography with computed tomography, and computed tomography in restaging patients with esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Patients with esophageal cancer who receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy are restaged with computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and integrated positron emission computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT), and the results affect treatment.
  
  
  METHODS
  This is a prospective trial on a consecutive series of patients who had initial chest, abdomen, and pelvis CT scan; EUS-FNA; and fluoro-2-deoxy- d -glucose (FDG)-integrated PET/CT; neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; repeat staging tests; pathologic staging; and, if appropriate, resection with lymphadenectomy. The primary objective was to assess the accuracy of these 3 tests in restaging patients after neoadjuvant therapy.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were 48 patients (41 men), and 41 underwent Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy with lymphadenectomy. The accuracy of each test for distinguishing pathologic T4 from T1 to T3 disease is 76%, 80%, and 80% for CT scan, EUS-FNA and FDG-PET/CT, respectively. The accuracy for nodal disease was 78%, 78%, and 93% for CT scan, EUS-FNA and FDG-PET/CT, respectively ( P = .04). FDG-PET/CT correctly identified M1b disease in 4 patients, falsely suggested it in 4 patients, and missed it in 2 patients, whereas for CT, it was 3, 3, and 3 patients. Fifteen (31%) patients were complete responders, and FDG-PET/CT accurately predicted complete response in 89% compared with 67% for EUS-FNA ( P = .045) and 71% for CT ( P = .05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  FDG-PET/CT is more accurate than EUS-FNA and CT scan for predicting nodal status and complete responders after neoadjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal cancer. FDG-PET/CT and CT alone provide targets for biopsy, but results are often falsely positive.
authors.affiliation: Section of Thoracic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Ala, USA. robert.cerfolio@ccc.uab.edu
authors.forename: Robert James
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Cerfolio
authors.forename: Ayesha S
authors.initials: AS
authors.lastname: Bryant
authors.forename: Buddhiwardhan
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Ohja
authors.forename: Alfred A
authors.initials: AA
authors.lastname: Bartolucci
authors.forename: Mohamad A
authors.initials: MA
authors.lastname: Eloubeidi
mesh_terms: D000230:Adenocarcinoma / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000628:therapy*; D000368:Aged; D044963:Biopsy, Fine-Needle / Q000379:methods; D002294:Carcinoma, Squamous Cell / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000628:therapy*; D017024:Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; D019160:Endosonography; D004938:Esophageal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000628:therapy*; D004947:Esophagus / Q000473:pathology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D020360:Neoadjuvant Therapy; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D049268:Positron-Emission Tomography; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011446:Prospective Studies; D018714:Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed