{"title":"68Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04和18F-FDG PET/CT：对腹膜癌诊断准确性的正面比较","authors":"Xiaolin Chen, Xiao Pang, Yan Zhao, Xinming Zhao, Yunuan Liu, Fenglian Jing, Huiqing Yuan, Xiaoshan Chen, Tianyue Li, Yingchen Wang, Yali Liu, Jingya Han, Jingmian Zhang, Jianfang Wang, Zhaoqi Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s00261-024-04653-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 (<sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI) and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in patients with various types of cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study enrolled 113 patients with suspected peritoneal malignancy, each of whom underwent <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT scans. Lesions in all patients were confirmed through pathology or radiological follow-up. The evaluation and comparison of diagnostic performance, visual scores, maximum standardized uptake value (SUV<sub>max</sub>), mean tumor-to-background ratio (TBR), and the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) score were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG, <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI PET/CT presented higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for detecting PC on a patient-level (100% vs. 93.2%, 100% vs. 22.22% and 93.81% vs. 86.73%, respectively). Semi-quantitative evaluation revealed that <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI PET/CT had significantly higher SUV<sub>max</sub> and TBR for PC [(6.06 ± 3.04 vs. 4.82 ± 2.75, P = 0.001) and (8.50 ± 5.01 vs. 2.92 ± 1.67, P < 0.001)]. The PCI<sub>-FAPI</sub> score for PC was higher than the PCI<sub>-FDG</sub> score (11.28 ± 7.10 vs. 5.69 ± 5.15, P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong><sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI has demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy compared to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT in detecting PC with various types of cancer, particularly gastric cancer. Additionally, <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI has shown significantly higher uptake and PCI score in PC compared to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG, indicating its potential importance in clinical.</p>","PeriodicalId":7126,"journal":{"name":"Abdominal Radiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"<sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT: a head-to-head comparison for peritoneal carcinomatosis diagnostic accuracy.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaolin Chen, Xiao Pang, Yan Zhao, Xinming Zhao, Yunuan Liu, Fenglian Jing, Huiqing Yuan, Xiaoshan Chen, Tianyue Li, Yingchen Wang, Yali Liu, Jingya Han, Jingmian Zhang, Jianfang Wang, Zhaoqi Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00261-024-04653-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 (<sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI) and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in patients with various types of cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study enrolled 113 patients with suspected peritoneal malignancy, each of whom underwent <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI and <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT scans. Lesions in all patients were confirmed through pathology or radiological follow-up. The evaluation and comparison of diagnostic performance, visual scores, maximum standardized uptake value (SUV<sub>max</sub>), mean tumor-to-background ratio (TBR), and the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) score were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG, <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI PET/CT presented higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for detecting PC on a patient-level (100% vs. 93.2%, 100% vs. 22.22% and 93.81% vs. 86.73%, respectively). Semi-quantitative evaluation revealed that <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI PET/CT had significantly higher SUV<sub>max</sub> and TBR for PC [(6.06 ± 3.04 vs. 4.82 ± 2.75, P = 0.001) and (8.50 ± 5.01 vs. 2.92 ± 1.67, P < 0.001)]. The PCI<sub>-FAPI</sub> score for PC was higher than the PCI<sub>-FDG</sub> score (11.28 ± 7.10 vs. 5.69 ± 5.15, P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong><sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI has demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy compared to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT in detecting PC with various types of cancer, particularly gastric cancer. Additionally, <sup>68</sup>Ga-FAPI has shown significantly higher uptake and PCI score in PC compared to <sup>18</sup>F-FDG, indicating its potential importance in clinical.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7126,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Abdominal Radiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Abdominal Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-024-04653-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Abdominal Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-024-04653-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的：比较68Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 （68Ga-FAPI）与18F-FDG PET/CT对不同类型肿瘤腹膜癌（PC）的诊断准确性。方法：研究纳入113例疑似腹膜恶性肿瘤患者，每位患者均接受68Ga-FAPI和18F-FDG PET/CT扫描。所有患者的病变均通过病理或影像学随访得到证实。对诊断表现、视觉评分、最大标准化摄取值（SUVmax）、平均肿瘤与背景比（TBR）、腹膜癌指数（PCI）评分进行评价和比较。结果：与18F-FDG相比，68Ga-FAPI PET/CT在患者层面检测PC的灵敏度、阴性预测值和准确率分别为100%比93.2%、100%比22.22%和93.81%比86.73%。半定量评价显示，68Ga-FAPI PET/CT对PC的SUVmax和TBR均有显著提高[（6.06±3.04 vs. 4.82±2.75,P = 0.001）和(8.50±5.01 vs. 2.92±1.67，PC的P -FAPI评分高于PCI-FDG评分(11.28±7.10 vs. 5.69±5.15，P]]结论：68Ga-FAPI对不同类型肿瘤的PC，尤其是胃癌的诊断准确性优于18F-FDG PET/CT。此外，与18F-FDG相比，68Ga-FAPI在PC中的摄取和PCI评分明显更高，表明其在临床中的潜在重要性。
68Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 and 18F-FDG PET/CT: a head-to-head comparison for peritoneal carcinomatosis diagnostic accuracy.
Purpose: The study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of 68Ga-DOTA-FAPI-04 (68Ga-FAPI) and 18F-FDG PET/CT for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in patients with various types of cancer.
Methods: The study enrolled 113 patients with suspected peritoneal malignancy, each of whom underwent 68Ga-FAPI and 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Lesions in all patients were confirmed through pathology or radiological follow-up. The evaluation and comparison of diagnostic performance, visual scores, maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), mean tumor-to-background ratio (TBR), and the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) score were conducted.
Results: Compared to 18F-FDG, 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT presented higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for detecting PC on a patient-level (100% vs. 93.2%, 100% vs. 22.22% and 93.81% vs. 86.73%, respectively). Semi-quantitative evaluation revealed that 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT had significantly higher SUVmax and TBR for PC [(6.06 ± 3.04 vs. 4.82 ± 2.75, P = 0.001) and (8.50 ± 5.01 vs. 2.92 ± 1.67, P < 0.001)]. The PCI-FAPI score for PC was higher than the PCI-FDG score (11.28 ± 7.10 vs. 5.69 ± 5.15, P < 0.001).
Conclusions: 68Ga-FAPI has demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting PC with various types of cancer, particularly gastric cancer. Additionally, 68Ga-FAPI has shown significantly higher uptake and PCI score in PC compared to 18F-FDG, indicating its potential importance in clinical.
期刊介绍：
Abdominal Radiology seeks to meet the professional needs of the abdominal radiologist by publishing clinically pertinent original, review and practice related articles on the gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts and abdominal interventional and radiologic procedures. Case reports are generally not accepted unless they are the first report of a new disease or condition, or part of a special solicited section.
Reasons to Publish Your Article in Abdominal Radiology:
· Official journal of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR)
· Published in Cooperation with:
European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR)
European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)
Asian Society of Abdominal Radiology (ASAR)
· Efficient handling and Expeditious review
· Author feedback is provided in a mentoring style
· Global readership
· Readers can earn CME credits
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
