Is there a place for FET PET in the initial evaluation of brain lesions with unknown significance?
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical value of the use of O-(2-[(18)F]fluoroethyl)-L: -tyrosine (FET) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) in patients of a neurological clinic for evaluation of brain lesions newly diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).


METHODS
We evaluated 88 patients (44 women and 44 men) with a mean age of 50 +/- 19 years who were sent consecutively for evaluation of an intracerebral mass or lesion observed by MRI from 2006 to 2008. Hospitalization was necessary due to neurological clinical symptoms. Images were obtained by PET/CT 30 min after i.v. injection of 185 MBq FET. Coregistration with MRI was done by HERMES workstation.


RESULTS
FET uptake above the cortical level was observed in 60 patients. Neurosurgery was performed in 60 patients (51 with FET-positive imaging); 36 high-grade and 19 low-grade tumours were verified histologically. The sensitivity of FET PET for high-grade tumours (WHO III-IV) was 94% in this setting. Among the low-grade brain tumours (WHO I-II) 13 of 19 were FET positive, which indicates a sensitivity of 68%. Five of ten (50%) astrocytomas I and II could not be visualized by FET. Histological data were not provided for 28 of 88 patients, so the diagnostic approach is based upon longitudinal observation. Radiological and/or clinical control was done at a median of 7 months later. Three patients (all FET positive) died a few months after the examination because of rapid progression of the malignant brain tumour. A malignant entity could be excluded in the other 25 patients. Considering the whole cohort of 88 patients, 43 patients with malignant tumour could be identified, including high-grade glioma, intracerebral lymphoma (n = 1) and metastasis (n = 3). The sensitivity of FET PET for detecting a malignant tumour entity was 93%. We observed two false-positive cases with postischaemic lesions. Remarkably, the two patients with cerebral gliomatosis were false-negative on FET PET imaging. The negative predictive value for a malignant entity was calculated to be 89%.


CONCLUSIONS
Our results indicate a high sensitivity of FET PET for detecting high-grade glioma in patients with neurological symptoms and recently observed brain lesions by MRI. In the setting of evaluating new brain lesions of unknown significance via FET PET a negative image can encourage a wait and see strategy-of course in accordance with the clinical picture and morphological imaging.
Pichler
Robert
R
Institute of Nuclear Medicine, Wagner-Jauregg Hospital, Wagner-Jauregg Weg 15, 4021 Linz, Austria. Robert.Pichler@gespag.at
Dunzinger
Andreas
A
Wurm
Gabriele
G
Pichler
Josef
J
Weis
Serge
S
Nussbaumer
Karin
K
Topakian
Raffi
R
Aigner
Reingard M
RM
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001932:Brain Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D005260:Female; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D049268:Positron-Emission Tomography / Q000379:methods*; D011859:Radiography; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D014443:Tyrosine / Q000031:analogs & derivatives*
C117289:O-(2-fluoroethyl)tyrosine; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; D014443:Tyrosine
J Nucl Med. 1999 Aug;40(8):1367-73
10450690
Radiat Oncol. 2008 Dec 24;3:44
19108742
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009 Feb;36(2):182-93
18818918
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005 Sep;32(9):1018-25
15877226
J Nucl Med. 2001 Mar;42(3):432-45
11337520
Nucl Med Biol. 2006 Apr;33(3):287-94
16631076
J Nucl Med. 2007 Apr;48(4):519-27
17401087
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005 Apr;32(4):422-9
15650870
J Neurooncol. 2007 Sep;84(3):305-14
17492401
J Nucl Med. 2008 May;49(5):721-9
18413402
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2009 Sep;151(9):1061-9
19468675
Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004 Jun;48(2):76-81
15243405
J Nucl Med. 2004 Mar;45(3):374-81
15001676
J Nucl Med. 2008 May;49(5):730-7
18413396
Brain. 2005 Mar;128(Pt 3):678-87
15689365
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007 Mar;28(3):455-61
17353312
J Nucl Med. 2006 May;47(5):776-82
16644747
J Nucl Med. 2006 Mar;47(3):393-403
16513607
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002 Aug;29(8):1039-46
12173018
Eur J Nucl Med. 2000 May;27(5):542-9
10853810