We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT with 18F-FDG PET/CT for diagnosis and staging of gastric and colorectal cancer.
Nuclear Medicine Communications 2024 April 30
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/computed tomography (CT) for the diagnosis of primary and metastatic gastric cancer and colorectal cancer lesions as compared with 18F-FDG PET/CT.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine patients who underwent both 18F-FDG and 68Ga-FAPI-04 for initial staging or restaging were enrolled. Histopathological findings and clinical imaging follow-up were used as the reference standard. The diagnostic performance and TNM staging of the two tracers were calculated and compared. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), tumour-to-mediastinal blood pool ratio (TBR) (lesions SUVmax/ascending aorta SUVmean), and tumour-to-normal liver parenchyma ratio (TLR) (lesions SUVmax/liver SUVmean) of primary and metastatic lesions between two imaging modalities were measured and compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and paired t-test.
RESULTS: The two imaging agents are comparable for the detection of primary tumors. The sensitivity of 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT was higher than that of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting lymph node metastases, peritoneal metastases, liver metastases, and bone metastases. In the patient-based analysis, the TLR for all lesions was significantly higher with 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT than with 18F-FDG PET/CT (all P < 0.05). The accuracy (92.2 vs. 70.3%, P = 0.002) and sensitivity of 68Ga-FAPI-04 were significantly higher than that of 18F-FDG (78.6 vs. 71.4%, P = 0.011) in determining the lymph node status. 68Ga-FAPI-04 has a higher accuracy in staging (P = 0.041), which is mainly due to the ability of distant metastases detection.
CONCLUSION: 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT may be superior in evaluating the diagnostic efficiency and staging accuracy of gastric and colorectal cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine patients who underwent both 18F-FDG and 68Ga-FAPI-04 for initial staging or restaging were enrolled. Histopathological findings and clinical imaging follow-up were used as the reference standard. The diagnostic performance and TNM staging of the two tracers were calculated and compared. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), tumour-to-mediastinal blood pool ratio (TBR) (lesions SUVmax/ascending aorta SUVmean), and tumour-to-normal liver parenchyma ratio (TLR) (lesions SUVmax/liver SUVmean) of primary and metastatic lesions between two imaging modalities were measured and compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and paired t-test.
RESULTS: The two imaging agents are comparable for the detection of primary tumors. The sensitivity of 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT was higher than that of 18F-FDG PET/CT for detecting lymph node metastases, peritoneal metastases, liver metastases, and bone metastases. In the patient-based analysis, the TLR for all lesions was significantly higher with 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT than with 18F-FDG PET/CT (all P < 0.05). The accuracy (92.2 vs. 70.3%, P = 0.002) and sensitivity of 68Ga-FAPI-04 were significantly higher than that of 18F-FDG (78.6 vs. 71.4%, P = 0.011) in determining the lymph node status. 68Ga-FAPI-04 has a higher accuracy in staging (P = 0.041), which is mainly due to the ability of distant metastases detection.
CONCLUSION: 68Ga-FAPI-04 PET/CT may be superior in evaluating the diagnostic efficiency and staging accuracy of gastric and colorectal cancer.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Obesity pharmacotherapy in older adults: a narrative review of evidence.International Journal of Obesity 2024 May 7
SGLT2 Inhibitors in Kidney Diseases-A Narrative Review.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 May 2
Use of Intravenous Albumin: A Guideline from the International Collaboration for Transfusion Medicine Guidelines.Chest 2024 March 5
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app