Advertisement
Journal of Clinical Oncology  
Search for:
Limit by:
  Browse by Subject or Issue
Home Search or Browse JCO My JCO Subscriptions Customer Service Site Map

Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.2238 on March 2 2009

Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol 27, No 11 (April 10), 2009: pp. 1767-1773
© 2009 American Society of Clinical Oncology.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Publisher's Note
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Save to my personal folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRights & Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nishizawa, S.
Right arrow Articles by Fukushima, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nishizawa, S.
Right arrow Articles by Fukushima, M.
Related Articles
Right arrowRelated Editorial
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Cancer Prevention and Control

Prospective Evaluation of Whole-Body Cancer Screening With Multiple Modalities Including [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in a Healthy Population: A Preliminary Report

Sadahiko Nishizawa, Shinsuke Kojima, Satoshi Teramukai, Masayuki Inubushi, Hironobu Kodama, Yoshiki Maeda, Hiroyuki Okada, Bin Zhou, Yoji Nagai, Masanori Fukushima

From the Hamamatsu Medical Imaging Center, Hamamatsu Medical Photonics Foundation; Development Bureau and Central Research Laboratory, Hamamatsu Photonics KK, Shizuoka; Translational Research Informatics Center, Foundation for Biomedical Research and Innovation, Hyogo; and the Translational Research Center, Kyoto University Hospital, Kyoto, Japan.

Corresponding author: Sadahiko Nishizawa, MD, PhD, Hamamatsu Medical Imaging Center, Hamamatsu Medical Photonics Foundation, 5000 Hirakuchi, Hamakita-ku, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka 434-0041, Japan; e-mail: sadahiko{at}hmp.or.jp.

Purpose To prospectively evaluate the utility of whole-body cancer screening with multiple modalities including [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in a healthy population. This report summarizes the results of the first three annual screenings.

Participants and Methods A total of 1,197 healthy volunteers ≥ 35 years old were enrolled between August 2003 and July 2004 and offered annual cancer screening for 5 years with subsequent long-term follow-up. Screening modalities included were whole-body FDG-PET, chest and abdominal computed tomography (CT), brain and pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, several tumor markers, and fecal occult blood testing.

Results As of the end of 2006, 22 primary cancers were pathologically confirmed. Nineteen of 22 were detected by the screening; 18 in the initial, one in the second, and none in the third. Three were diagnosed after development of symptoms. Of the 18 detected in the initial screening (six thyroid, four lung, three prostate, three breast, one endometrial, and one thymic), 12 were at stage I and 11 were PET positive. PET-negative cancers were detected by CT or the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. Sensitivity and specificity were 50.0% (11 of 22) and 93.2% (1,095 of 1,175), respectively, for FDG-PET alone and 81.8% (18 of 22) and 82.0% (963 of 1,175), respectively, for the combination of imaging modalities and PSA.

Conclusion While FDG-PET alone is insufficient, whole-body cancer screening with selected modalities including FDG-PET has initial performance supporting possible utility by detecting a wide variety of early-stage cancers with reasonable sensitivity. However, the detection of many indolent cancers and false positives necessitate continuing study for appropriate evaluation.

S.N. and S.K. contributed equally to this study.

Supported by the Hamamatsu Medical Photonics Foundation.

Presented in part in abstract format at 41st Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Orlando, FL, May 13-17, 2005; and 42nd Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Atlanta, GA, June 2-6, 2006.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?

Related Editorial

  • Screening for Cancer With High Technology Imaging Tests
    Bruce J. Hillman
    JCO 2009 27: 1740-1741 [Full Text]


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JCOHome page
B. J. Hillman
Screening for Cancer With High Technology Imaging Tests
J. Clin. Oncol., April 10, 2009; 27(11): 1740 - 1741.
[Full Text] [PDF]



About
JCO
 Editorial
Roster
 Advertising
Information
 Librarians &
Institutions
 Rights &
Permissions
 PDA Services

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Online ISSN: 1527-7755. Print ISSN: 0732-183X
Terms and Conditions of Use
  HighWire Press HighWire Press™ assists in the publication of JCO Online