Background: Findings on 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) are surrogate markers of malignancy in lung adenocarcinoma. Breathing during PET/CT can substantially reduce the maximum standardized uptake value (maxSUV) of lung tumors when they are located at the lower zone (LZ). Objectives: We assessed whether lung cancer location influences the malignancy predicted by maxSUV. Methods: 608 patients with clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma had been preoperatively examined by PET/CT and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT). We evaluated the clinicopathological characteristics of these patients and the accuracy of precognition obtained by maxSUV between the upper zone (UZ, n = 395) and the LZ (n = 213). maxSUV was also analyzed for matched pairs between the two groups. Results: The mean maxSUV in the LZ group was significantly lower than that in the UZ group (1.98 ± 1.73 vs. 2.44 ± 2.43, respectively; p = 0.0145). The receiver operating characteristics curve of maxSUV for predicting high-grade malignancy (lymphatic, vascular, pleural invasion, or lymph node metastasis) was larger for the UZ group than for the LZ group [0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86-0.93, vs. 0.82, 95% CI 0.76-0.88]. Analysis for maxSUV of 213 pairs matched for the solid component size on HRCT, pathological characteristics, and gender revealed that maxSUV in the LZ group was significantly lower than that in the UZ group (1.98 ± 1.73 vs. 2.47 ± 2.39, respectively; p < 0.001). Conclusions: maxSUV of a tumor in the LZ group is apparently lower than the value which reflects the potential malignancy of a tumor. We have to carefully consider these facts when selecting the appropriate surgical procedure for lung cancer with PET/CT and HRCT.

Keywords:
Lung carcinoma, Positron emission tomography imaging in lung cancer, Location
1.
Tsutani Y, Miyata Y, Nakayama H, Okumura S, Adachi S, Yoshimura M, et al: Prognostic significance of using solid versus whole tumor size on high-resolution computed tomography for predicting pathologic malignant grade of tumors in clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma: a multicenter study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012;143:607-612.
2.
Tsutani Y, Miyata Y, Yamanaka T, Nakayama H, Okumura S, Adachi S, et al: Solid tumors versus mixed tumors with a ground-glass opacity component in patients with clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma: prognostic comparison using high-resolution computed tomography findings. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013;146:17-23.
3.
Nakamoto Y, Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Osman M, Marshall LT, Wahl RL: Accuracy of image fusion of normal upper abdominal organs visualized with PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:597-602.
4.
Osman MM, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, Marshall LT, Leal JP, Wahl RL: Clinically significant inaccurate localization of lesions with PET/CT: frequency in 300 patients. J Nucl Med 2003;44:240-243.
5.
Pan T, Mawlawi O, Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Luo D, Liu HH, et al: Attenuation correction of PET images with respiration-averaged CT images in PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1481-1487.
6.
Goldstraw P, Crowley J, Chansky K, Giroux DJ, Groome PA, Rami-Porta R: The IASLC lung cancer staging project: proposals for the revision of the TNM stage groupings in the forthcoming (seventh) edition of the TNM classification of malignant tumours. J Thorac Oncol 2007;2:706-714.
7.
Nakayama H, Okumura S, Daisaki H, Kato Y, Uehara H, Adachi S: Value of integrated positron emission tomography revised using a phantom study to evaluate malignancy grade of lung adenocarcinoma: a multicenter study. Cancer 2010;116:3170-3177.
8.
Okada M, Nakayama H, Okumura S, Daisaki H, Adachi S, Yoshimura M: Multicenter analysis of high-resolution computed tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography findings to choose therapeutic strategies for clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2011;141:1384-1391.
9.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, Rosenzweig KE, Squire OD, Braban LE, et al: Effect of respiratory gating on reducing lung motion artifacts in PET imaging of lung cancer. Med Phys 2002;29:366-371.
10.
Erdi YE, Nehmeh SA, Pan T, Pevsner A, Rosenzweig KE, Mageras G, et al: The CT motion quantitation of lung lesions and its impact on PET-measured SUVs. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1287-1292.
11.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Pan T, Pevsner A, Rosenzweig KE, Yorke E, et al: Four-dimensional (4D) PET/CT imaging of the thorax. Med Phys 2004;31:3179-3186.
12.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, Rosenzweig KE, Schoder H, Larson SM, et al: Effect of respiratory gating on quantifying PET images of lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2002;43:876-881.
13.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE: Respiratory motion in positron emission tomography/computed tomography: a review. Semin Nucl Med 2008;38:167-176.
14.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Meirelles GS, Squire O, Larson SM, Humm JL, et al: Deep-inspiration breath-hold PET/CT of the thorax. J Nucl Med 2007;48:22-26.
15.
Kawano T, Ohtake E, Inoue T: Deep-inspiration breath-hold PET/CT of lung cancer: maximum standardized uptake value analysis of 108 patients. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1223-1231.
16.
Torizuka T, Tanizaki Y, Kanno T, Futatsubashi M, Yoshikawa E, Okada H, et al: Single 20-second acquisition of deep-inspiration breath-hold PET/CT: clinical feasibility for lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2009;50:1579-1584.
17.
Lamare F, Ledesma Carbayo MJ, Cresson T, Kontaxakis G, Santos A, Le Rest CC, et al: List-mode-based reconstruction for respiratory motion correction in PET using non-rigid body transformations. Phys Med Biol 2007;52:5187-5204.
18.
Liu C, Pierce LA 2nd, Alessio AM, Kinahan PE: The impact of respiratory motion on tumor quantification and delineation in static PET/CT imaging. Phys Med Biol 2009;54:7345-7362.
19.
Dewan NA, Gupta NC, Redepenning LS, Phalen JJ, Frick MP: Diagnostic efficacy of PET-FDG imaging in solitary pulmonary nodules. Potential role in evaluation and management. Chest 1993;104:997-1002.
20.
Brocken P, van der Heijden HF, Dekhuijzen PN, Peters-Bax L, de Geus-Oei LF: High performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and contrast-enhanced CT in a rapid outpatient diagnostic program for patients with suspected lung cancer. Respiration 2014;87:32-37.
21.
Huang TC, Wang YC, Kao CH: Thoracic tumor volume delineation in 4D-PET/CT by low dose interpolated CT for attenuation correction. PLoS One 2013;8:e75903.
22.
Watanabe S: Lymph node dissection for lung cancer: past, present, and future. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014;62:407-414.
23.
Whitson BA, Groth SS, Andrade RS, Maddaus MA, Habermann EB, D'Cunha J: Survival after lobectomy versus segmentectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a population-based analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2011;92:1943-1950.
24.
Jensik RJ, Faber LP, Milloy FJ, Monson DO: Segmental resection for lung cancer. A fifteen-year experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1973;66:563-572.
25.
Kodama K, Doi O, Higashiyama M, Yokouchi H: Intentional limited resection for selected patients with T1 N0 M0 non-small-cell lung cancer: a single-institution study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997;114:347-353.
26.
Okada M, Yoshikawa K, Hatta T, Tsubota N: Is segmentectomy with lymph node assessment an alternative to lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer of 2 cm or smaller? Ann Thorac Surg 2001;71:956-960.
27.
Yoshikawa K, Tsubota N, Kodama K, Ayabe H, Taki T, Mori T: Prospective study of extended segmentectomy for small lung tumors: the final report. Ann Thorac Surg 2002;73:1055-1058, discussion 1058-1059.
28.
Okada M, Koike T, Higashiyama M, Yamato Y, Kodama K, Tsubota N, et al: Radical sublobar resection for small-sized non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006;132:769-775.
29.
Ohtaki Y, Shimizu K: Anatomical thoracoscopic segmentectomy for lung cancer. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014;62:586-593.
30.
Sawabata N: Locoregional recurrence after pulmonary sublobar resection of non-small cell lung cancer: can it be reduced by considering cancer cells at the surgical margin? Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013;61:9-16.
© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel
2015
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.