Purpose
Nationwide mass vaccination against Covid-19 started in Israel in late 2020. Soon we identified on [18F]FDG PET-CT studies vaccine-associated hypermetabolic lymphadenopathy (VAHL) in axillary or supraclavicular lymph nodes (ASLN) ipsilateral to the vaccination site. Sometimes, differentiation between the malignant and benign nature of the hypermetabolic lymphadenopathy (HLN) could not be made, and equivocal HLN (EqHL) was reported. The purpose of the study was to determine the overall incidence of VAHL after BNT162b2 vaccination and also its relevance to PET-CT interpretation in oncologic patients.
Methods
A total of 951 consecutive patients that underwent [18F]FDG PET-CT studies in our department were interviewed regarding the sites and dates of the vaccine doses. A total of 728 vaccinated patients (All-Vac group) were included: 346 received the first dose only (Vac-1 group) and 382 received the booster dose as well (Vac-2 group). Studies were categorized as no HLN, malignant-HLN (MHL), VAHL, or EqHL. In studies with VAHL, location, [18F]FDG-intensity uptake and nodes size were recorded.
Results
The incidences of HLN were 45.6%, 36.4%, and 53.9% in All-Vac, Vac-1, and Vac-2 groups, respectively. VAHL was reported in 80.1% of vaccinated patients with HLN. Lower incidences of VAHL were found during the first 5 days or in the third week after the first vaccine and beyond 20 days after the booster dose. In 49 of 332 (14.8%) vaccinated patients, we could not determine whether HLN was MHL or VAHL. Breast cancer and lymphoma were the leading diseases with EqHL.
Conclusion
VAHL is frequently observed after BNT162b2 administration, more commonly and with higher intensity following the booster dose. To minimize false and equivocal reports in oncological patients, timing of [18F]FDG PET-CT should be based on the time intervals found to have a lower incidence of VAHL, and choice of vaccine injection site should be advised, mainly in patients where ASLN are a relevant site of tumor involvement.
18 F-PSMA-1007 is a novel prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-based radiopharmaceutical for imaging prostate cancer (PCa). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of 18 F-PSMA-1007 with 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT in the same patients presenting with newly diagnosed intermediate-or high-risk PCa. Methods: Sixteen patients with intermediate-or high-risk PCa underwent 18 F-PSMA-1007 and 68 Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT within 15 d. PET findings were compared between the 2 radiotracers and with reference-standard pathologic specimens obtained from radical prostatectomy. The Cohen κ-coefficient was used to assess the concordance between 18 F-PSMA-1007 and 68 Ga-PSMA-11 for detection of intraprostatic lesions. The McNemar test was used to assess agreement between intraprostatic PET/CT findings and histopathologic findings. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were reported for each radiotracer. SUV max was measured for all lesions, and tumor-to-background activity was calculated. Areas under receiver-operating-characteristic curves were calculated for discriminating diseased from nondiseased prostate segments, and optimal SUV cutoffs were calculated using the Youden index for each radiotracer. Results: PSMA-avid lesions in the prostate were identified in all 16 patients with an almost perfect concordance between the 2 tracers (κ ranged from 0.871 to 1). Aside from the dominant intraprostatic lesion, similarly detected by both radiotracers, a second less intense positive focus was detected in 4 patients only with 18 F-PSMA-1007. Three of these secondary foci were confirmed as Gleason grade 3 lesions, whereas the fourth was shown on pathologic examination to represent chronic prostatitis. Conclusion: This pilot study showed that both 18 F-PSMA-1007 and 68 Ga-PSMA-11 identify all dominant prostatic lesions in patients with intermediateor high-risk PCa at staging. 18 F-PSMA-1007, however, may detect additional low-grade lesions of limited clinical relevance.
Background
[18F]-Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET/CT) may sometimes be suboptimal for imaging gastric adenocarcinoma. The recently introduced [68Ga]Ga-FAPI-04 (FAPI) PET/CT targets tumor stroma and has shown considerable potential in evaluating the extent of disease in a variety of tumors.
Methods
We performed a head-to-head prospective comparison of FAPI and FDG PET/CT in the same group of 13 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who presented for either initial staging (n = 10) or restaging (n = 3) of disease. Lesion detection and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) were compared between the two types of radiotracers.
Results
All ten primary gastric tumors were FAPI-positive (100% detection rate), whereas only five were also FDG-positive (50%). SUVmax was not significantly different, but the tumor-to-background ratio was higher for FAPI (mean, median, and range of 4.5, 3.2, and 0.8–9.7 for FDG and 12.9, 11.9, and 2.2–23.9 for FAPI, P = 0.007). The level of detection of regional lymph node involvement was comparable. FAPI showed a superior detection rate for peritoneal carcinomatosis (100% vs. none). Two patients with widespread peritoneal carcinomatosis underwent a follow-up FAPI scan after chemotherapy: one showed partial remission and the other showed progressive disease.
Conclusions
The findings of this pilot study suggest that FAPI PET/CT outperforms FDG PET/CT in detecting both primary gastric adenocarcinoma and peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer. FAPI PET/CT also shows promise for monitoring response to treatment in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer; however, larger trials are needed to validate these preliminary findings.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.