Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

2-Deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-Positron Emission Tomography in Characterization of Solid Renal Masses

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Molecular Imaging and Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

 

The present study was aimed to evaluate the ability of 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) in characterization of solid renal masses visualized by computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with suspected or known malignancies.

Methods

Twenty-eight solid renal masses (20 unilateral and four bilateral, Size ranges, 1.0–8.4 cm) were evaluated in 24 patients. The results were correlated with histopathology in 15 patients, and clinical follow-up and conventional imaging in all patients.

Results

Of the 28 solid renal masses, 10 were primary (nine malignant, one benign) and 18 were metastatic renal tumors. FDG-PET accurately depicted 23 of 27 (85%) malignant renal masses. Of the 10 primary renal tumors, FDG-PET was true positive in eight of nine (89%), true negative in one and false negative in one. The maximum and average standardized uptake values (SUVs) for FDG positive primary renal malignant tumors were 7.9 ± 4.9 and 6.0 ± 3.6, respectively. In addition to the characterization of primary tumors, FDG-PET was valuable in primary staging and altered treatment in 30% of patients (three of 10). Of the 18 metastatic renal masses, FDG-PET was positive in 15 (83%) masses. The maximum and average SUVs of metastatic renal masses were 6.1 ± 3.4 and 4.7 ± 2.8, respectively. There was no significant difference in maximum and average SUVs between primary and metastatic renal masses (p = 0.3 and p = 0.3).

Conclusion

Despite the physiological excretion of FDG by the kidneys, FDG-PET can be employed effectively in characterization of solid renal masses in patients with suspected or known malignancies. We propose that FDG-PET could be useful as a complimentary modality to conventional imaging in these patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Belldegrun AS (2001) The changing natural history of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 166:1611–1623

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Newsam JE, Tulloch WS (1966) Metastatic tumours in the kidney. Br J Urol 38:1–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Luciani LG, Cestari R, Tallarigo C (2000) Incidental renal cell carcinoma-age and stage characterisation and clinical implications: Study of 1092 patients (1982–1997). Urology 56:58–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Mathew A, Devesa SS, Fraumeni JF Jr, Chow WH (2002) Global increases in kidney cancer incidence, 1973–1992. Eur J Cancer Prev 11:171–178

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chow WH, Devesa SS, Warren JL, Fraumeni JF Jr (1999) Rising incidence of renal cell cancer in the United States. JAMA 281:1628–1631

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Harisinghani MG, Maher MM, Gervais DA, et al. (2003) Incidence of malignancy in complex cystic renal masses (Bosniak category III): Should imaging-guided biopsy precede surgery? AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:755–758

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mickisch G, Carballido J, Hellsten S, Schulze H, Mensink H (2001) Guidelines on renal cell cancer. Eur Urol 40:252–255

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Li G, Cuilleron M, Gentil-Perret A, Tostain J (2004) Characteristics of image-detected solid renal masses: Implication for optimal treatment. Int J Urol 11:63–67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Tello R, Davison BD, O'Malley M, et al. (2000) MR imaging of renal masses interpreted on CT to be suspicious. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:1017–1022

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kumar R, Jana S (2004) Positron emission tomography: An advanced nuclear medicine imaging technique from research to clinical practice. Methods Enzymol 385:3–19

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hustinx R, Benard F, Alavi A (2002) Whole-body F18-FDG-PETimaging in the management of patients with cancer. Semin Nucl Med 32:35–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Safaei A, Figlin R, Hoh CK, et al. (2002) The usefulness of F-18 deoxyglucose whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) for re-staging of renal cell cancer. Clin Nephrol 57:56–62

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Wahl RL, Harney J, Hutchins G, Grossman HB (1991) Imaging of renal cancer using positron emitting tomography with 2-deoxy-2-(18F)-fluoro-d-glucose: Pilot animal and human studies. J Urol 146:1470–1474

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kocher F, Geimmel S, Hauptmann R, Reske S (1994) Preoperative lymph node staging in patients with kidney and urinary bladder neoplasm. J Nucl Med 35(Suppl):223P [abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bachor R, Kotzerke J, Gottfried HW, Brandle E, Reske SN, Hautmann R (1996) Positron emission tomography in diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma. Urologe A 35:146–150

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Goldberg MA, Mayo-Smith WW, Papanicolaou N, Fischman AJ, Lee MJ (1997) F18-FDG-PETcharacterisation of renal masses: Preliminary experience. Clin Radiol 52:510–515

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Montravers F, Grahek D, Kerrou K, et al. (2000) Evaluation of FDG uptake by renal malignancies (primary tumor or metastases) using a coincidence detection gamma camera. J Nucl Med 41:78–84

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ramdave S, Thomas GW, Berlangieri SU, Bolton DM, Davis I, Danguy HT (2001) Clinical role of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for detection and management of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 166:825–830

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Volpe A, Panzarella T, Rendon RA, Haider MA, Kondylis FI, Jewett MA (2004) The natural history of incidentally detected small renal masses. Cancer 100:738–745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Silverman SG, Lee BY, Seltzer SE, Bloom DA, Corless CL, Adams DF (1994) Small (< or = 3 cm) renal masses: Correlation of spiral CT features and pathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 163:597–605

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Brierly RD, Thomas PJ, Harrison NW, Fletcher MS, Nawrocki JD, Ashton-Key M (2000) Evaluation of fine-needle aspiration cytology for renal masses. BJU Int 85:14–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Scott AM, Larson SM (1993) Tumor imaging and therapy. Radiol Clin North Am 31:859–879

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Aide N, Cappele O, Bottet P, et al. (2003) Efficiency of [18F]F18-FDG-PETin characterizing renal cancer and detecting distant metastases: A comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med 30:1236–1245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Miyauchi T, Brown RS, Grossman HB (1996) Correlation between visualization of primary renal cancer by F18-FDG-PETand histopathological findings. J Nucl Med 37(Suppl):64P [abstract]

    Google Scholar 

  25. Miyakita H, Tokunaga M, Onda H, Usui Y, Kinoshita H, Kawamura N, et al. (2002) Significance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for detection of renal cell carcinoma and immunohistochemical glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1) expression in the cancer. Int J Urol 9:15–18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Zhuang H, Pourdehnad M, Lambright ES, et al. (2001) Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes. J Nucl Med 42:1412–1417

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

This research was supported in part by UICC (International Union Against Cancer) Geneva, Switzerland under ACSBI fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

    Rakesh Kumar MD & Anil Chauhan MD

  2. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA

    Paras Lakhani MD, Yan Xiu MD, Hongming Zhuang MD, PhD & Abass Alavi MD

Authors
  1. Rakesh Kumar MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anil Chauhan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paras Lakhani MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yan Xiu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hongming Zhuang MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Abass Alavi MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abass Alavi MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kumar, R., Chauhan, A., Lakhani, P. et al. 2-Deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-Positron Emission Tomography in Characterization of Solid Renal Masses. Mol Imaging Biol 7, 431–439 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-005-0026-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-005-0026-z

Key words

Search

Navigation