Editorial: PET/CT for Cancer Diagnosis, Staging and Prognosis


  • Jiaqiong Wang Quantitative Imaging Inc. Largo, FL, USA
  • Robert Carroll Quantitative Imaging Inc. Largo, FL, USA


Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) has been widely utilized in the clinic and in animal research for detecting and serially staging various types of neoplasms, including lymphomas, melanoma, lung cancer, thyroid cancer, head and neck cancer, esophagus and gastric cancer, colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer, gynecologic cancers, osteosarcoma, breast cancer, pheochromocytoma [1-7]. The most commonly utilized radiopharmaceutical for PET/CT is 2-deoxy-2-[18F] fluoroglucose (18F-FDG), a glucose analogue that is taken up by the cell through glucose transporters, and then phosphorylated within the cell reflecting the rate of glucose metabolism. Compared with normal cells, cancer cells have increased glucose metabolism. Accordingly, PET/CT imaging with 18F-FDG is able to reveal an increased glucose metabolism in tumors and to identify both primary neoplasm and their metastases.

PET/CT images can be interpreted visually and quantitatively. Standardized uptake value (SUV) is the most widely utilized quantitative parameter, with a SUV above 2.5 suggesting malignancy [8]. In addition, the highest pixel in the object of interest (SUVmax) and the average SUV value in a region of interest (SUVmean) are also useful parameters in the characterization of a neoplasm [9]. A higher SUV value indicates that the cancer is more aggressive and associated with a poorer prognosis.

PET/CT has been a valuable imaging approach in the diagnosis, staging and restaging of cancers. Many publications have demonstrated that PET/CT plays an important role in the staging and detecting of metastasis for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [10, 11], lymphomas [12, 13], breast cancer [14] and other types of neoplasms. Due to the superior sensitivity of PET/CT over other anatomic imaging methods, PET/CT has been employed forthe staging of Hodgkin Lymphoma at baseline and the restaging after therapy [12], the whole body staging of recurrent and metastatic breast cancer [14, 15], the localization of melanoma metastases [16, 17], as well as the detection of gynecologic cancers recurrence [18, 19].

PET/CT also provides insightful information about the patient’s response to treatment intervention. Reduction or resolution of 18F-FDG uptake suggests a favorable response. For instance, Wei and colleagues (2015) [20] utilized the SUVmax and evaluated the prognostic values of interim and post therapy 18F-FDG PET/CT for adult Burkitt’s lymphoma patients. They observed that compared to the SUVmax at baseline before treatment (a median SUVmax of 18.3, range 1.6-35.9), the SUVmax at mid-therapy PET/CT (a median SUVmax of 4.0, range 0-17.6) and the SUVmax at post-therapy PET/CT (a median SUVmax of 3.0, range 0-14.5) decreased significantly, indicating a promising response to chemotherapy [20]. On the other hand, no significant change of 18F-FDG uptake is an indicator of a lack of response to treatment and therefore alternative intervention should be considered. The NEOSCAN trial has utilized FDG PET/CT to measure the response to prechemotherapy in patients with resectable stage IB-IIIA non-small cell lung cancers [21]. For patients with less than 35% decrease in SUVpeak on therepeated FDG PET/CT, they were considered non-responding and then their chemotherapy was modified. Later these patients showed metabolic response to the alternative therapy on FDG PET/CT scan [21]. This clinical trial indicates the utility of FDG PET/CT to monitor and adjust perioperative chemotherapy in order to improve patients’ outcomes.

Another application of PET/CT is to search for occult tumors or unknown primary tumors. Utilizing PET/CT, Ducry and colleagues (2015) [22] detected mid-gut ACTH-secreting neuroendocrine tumors. Malkan and colleagues (2015) [23] discovered a case of diffuse large B cell lymphoma with extensive cutaneous relapse. Park and colleagues (2015) [11] found that volume-based PET parameter metabolic total volume and SUVmax are risk factors for occult lymph node metastasis in small-sized peripheral NSCLC. These findings result from the higher sensitivity of PET/CT scan than conventional diagnostic procedures.

However, not every abnormal 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging is consistent with malignancy. False positive FDG PET/CT scans may be observed in conditions including inflammation, infection or granulomatous disease [24]. Tuberculosis is a well-known cause of false-positive finding on PET-CT scan [25]. Suture granuloma also presented with high 18F-FDG accumulation and generated false-positive finding on PET-CT scan after surgery for gastric cancer [26]. Recently, a false positive axillary lymph node hypermetabolism has been reported on a PET/CT scan, and histopathologically it was induced by the leakage of silicone breast implant and silicone adenitis [27]. Accordingly, special attention should be paid to these conditions when interpreting positive PET/CT imaging.


Akthar AS, Ferguson MK, Koshy M, Vigneswaran WT, Malik R. Limitations of PET/CT in the Detection of Occult N1 Metastasis in Clinical Stage I(T1-2aN0) Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer for Staging Prior to Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2016; pii: 1533034615624045.


Apolo AB, Lindenberg L, Shih JH, Mena E, Kim JW, Park JC, Alikhani A, McKinney YY, Weaver J, Turkbey B, Parnes HL, Wood LV, Madan RA, Gulley JL, Dahut WL, Kurdziel KA, Choyke PL. Prospective Study Evaluating Na18F-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (NaF-PET/CT) in Predicting Clinical Outcomes and Survival in Advanced Prostate Cancer. J Nucl Med 2016; pii: jnumed.115.166512.

Baum RP, Kulkarni HR, Schuchardt C, Singh A, Wirtz M, Wiessalla S, Schottelius M, Mueller D, Klette I, Wester HJ. Lutetium-177 PSMA Radioligand Therapy of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Safety and Efficacy. J Nucl Med 2016; pii: jnumed.115.168443.

Bandopadhyaya GP, Kumar A, Kumari J. Role of (18)F-DOPA PET/CT and (131)I-MIBG planar scintigraphy in evaluating patients with pheochromocytoma. Hell J Nucl Med 2015; 18 Suppl 1: 141.

Cho LP, Kim CK, Viswanathan AN. Pilot study assessing (18)F-fluorothymidine PET/CT in cervical and vaginal cancers before and after external beam radiation. Gynecol Oncol Rep 2015; 14: 34-37.


O JH, Luber BS, Leal JP, Wang H, Bolejack V, Schuetze SM, Schwartz L, Helman LJ, Reinke D, Baker LH, Wahl RL. Response to early treatment evaluated with 18F-FDG PET and PERCIST 1.0 predicts survival in patients with Ewing sarcoma family of tumors treated with a monoclonal antibody to the insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor. J Nucl Med 2016; pii: jnumed.115.162412.

Pasqualetti F, Panichi M, Sainato A, Matteucci F, Galli L, Cocuzza P, Ferrazza P, Coraggio G, Pasqualetti G, Derosa L, Sollini M, Mannelli L, Ortori S, Monzani F, Ricci S, Greco C, Fabrini MG, Erba PA. [(18)F]Choline PET/CT and stereotactic body radiotherapy on treatment decision making of oligometastatic prostate cancer patients: preliminary results. Radiat Oncol 2016; 11(1): 9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-016-0586-x

Paidpally V, Chirindel A, Lam S, Agrawal N, Quon H, Subramaniam RM. FDG-PET/CT imaging biomarkers in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Imaging Med 2012; 4(6): 633-647.


Kendi AT, Corey A, Magliocca KR, Nickleach DC, Galt J, Switchenko JM, El-Deiry MW, Wadsworth JT, Hudgins PA, Saba NF, Schuster DM. 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters as imaging biomarkers in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma, is visual analysis of PET and contrast enhanced CT better than the numbers? Eur J Radiol 2015; 84(6): 1171-1176.


Promteangtrong C, Kunawudhi A, Phadungrerk R, Iamsa-art C, Chotipanich C. 18F-FDG PET/Contrast-Enhanced CT for Initial Staging and Strategic Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Prospective Study. J Med Assoc Thai 2015; 98(10): 1010-1018.

Park SY, Yoon JK, Park KJ, Lee SJ. Prediction of occult lymph node metastasis using volume-based PET parameters in small-sized peripheral non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Imaging 2015; 15(1): 21.


Barrington SF, Kirkwood AA, Franceschetto A, Fulham MJ, Roberts TH, Almquist H, Brun E, Hjorthaug K, Viney ZN, Pike LC, Federico M, Luminari S, Radford J, Trotman J, Fosså A, Berkahn L, Molin D, D'Amore F, Sinclair DA, Smith P, O'Doherty MJ, Stevens L, Johnson PW. PET-CT for staging & early response: results from 'Response Adapted Therapy in Advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma' (RATHL) (CRUK/07/033). Blood 2016; pii: blood-2015-11-679407.

Stecco A, Buemi F, Quagliozzi M, Lombardi M, Santagostino A, Sacchetti GM, Carriero A. Staging of Primary Abdominal Lymphomas: Comparison of Whole-Body MRI with Diffusion- Weighted Imaging and (18)F-FDG-PET/CT. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2015; 2015: 104794.


Sawicki LM, Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Buchbender C, Nagarajah J, Umutlu L, Antoch G, Kinner S. Evaluation of (18)F-FDG PET/MRI, (18)F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and CT in whole-body staging of recurrent breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85(2): 459-465. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.12.010

Sun Z, Yi YL, Liu Y, Xiong JP, He CZ. Comparison of whole-body PET/PET-CT and conventional imaging procedures for distant metastasis staging in patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 2015; 36(6): 672-676.

Chakraborty PS, Dhull VS, Karunanithi S, Verma S, Kumar R. Malignant melanoma with avitary pulmonary metastasis: Diagnostic dilemma resolved by FDG PET/CT guided biopsy. Indian J Nucl Med 2014; 29(3): 196-197.


Xiong Y, Lang Y, Tu C, Duan H. Pelvis metastasis from primary choroidal melanoma: a case report. Onco Targets Ther 2014; 7: 2107- 2110.


Fularz M, Adamiak P, Czepczynski R, Jarzabek-Bielecka G, Rewers A, Kedzia W, Ruchała M. Utility of PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer depending on CA 125 serum level. Nuklearmedizin 2015; 54(4): 158-162.


Mayoral M, Fernandez-Martinez A, Vidal L, Fuster D, Aya F, Pavia J, Pons F, Lomeña F, Paredes P. Prognostic value of

18F-FDG PET/CT volumetric parameters in recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2015. pii: S2253-654X(15)00117-1.


Wei WX, Huang JJ, Li WY, Zhang X, Xia Y, Jiang WQ, Fan W, Li ZM. Prognostic values of interim and post-therapy (18)F-FDG PET/CT scanning in adult patients with Burkitt's lymphoma. Chin J Cancer 2015; 34(3): 59.


Chaft JE, Dunphy M, Naidoo J, Travis WD, Hellmann M, Woo K, Downey R, Rusch V, Ginsberg MS, Azzoli CG, Kris MG. Adaptive neoadjuvant chemotherapy guided by 18F-FDG-PET in resectable non-small-cell lung cancers: the NEOSCAN trial. J Thorac Oncol 2015; pii: S1556-0864(15)00266-X.


Ducry J, Gomez F, Prior JO, Boubaker A, Matter M, Monti M, Pu Y, Pitteloud N, Portmann L. Mid-gut ACTH-secreting neuroendocrine tumor unmasked with (18)F-dihydroxyphenylalanine- positron emission tomography. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab Case Rep 2015; 2015: 140104.


Malkan UY, Gunes G, Yayar O, Demiroglu H. Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma with Extensive Cutaneous Relapse. Case Rep Med 2015; 2015: 137682.


Long NM, Smith CS. Causes and imaging features of false positives and false negatives on F-PET/CT in oncologic imaging. Insights Imaging 2011; 2(6): 679-698.


Du Toit R, Shaw JA, Irusen EM, Von Groote-Bidlingmaier F, Warwick JM, Koegelenberg CF. The diagnostic accuracy of integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of pulmonary mass lesions in a tuberculosis-endemic area. S Afr Med J 2015; 105(12): 1049-52.


Tsujita E, Ikeda Y, Kinjo N, Yamashita Y, Kumagai R, Taguchi K, Yamaguchi S, Minami K, Yamamoto M, Morita M, Toh Y, Okamura T. Suture granuloma with false-positive finding on PET/CT after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Asian J Endosc Surg 2015; 8(4): 457-460.

D'hulst L, Nicolaij D, Beels L, Gheysens O, Alaerts H, Van de Wiele C, Maes A. False positive axillary lymph nodes due to silicone adenitis on 18F-FDG PET/CT in an oncological setting. J Thorac Oncol 2016. pii: S1556-0864(16)00280-X. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ases.12206




How to Cite

Wang, J., & Carroll, R. (2021). Editorial: PET/CT for Cancer Diagnosis, Staging and Prognosis . Journal of Cancer Research Updates, 5(1), 1–3. Retrieved from https://www.neoplasiaresearch.com/pms/index.php/jcru/article/view/647