SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals: use of record linkage from the Osaka Cancer Registry

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Whole-body cancer screening with multimodalities including [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) detects a wide range of tumors. This program has been recognized as an option for opportunistic screening, particularly in Japan. However, reports on diagnostic accuracy have been limited. We aimed to evaluate the detectability and related properties of this screening program among asymptomatic individuals in a community setting.

Methods

The study participants were 1,762 residents of Osaka Prefecture, Japan, who underwent opportunistic cancer screening at Higashitemma Clinic for the first time between November 2004 and December 2005. FDG-PET cancer screening was performed with several imaging modalities (e.g., FDG-PET, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography) and fecal occult blood test. Screening records were linked to the Osaka cancer registry within 1 year after the screening to determine sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values.

Results

After excluding 12 participants with cancer detected before the screening, 33 were identified by the cancer registry to have primary cancers. Of these, the present screening program found that 28 were positive (6 prostate, 5 lung, 5 colorectal, 5 thyroid, 3 liver and 4 others). Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive values were 84.8 % (28/33, 95 % confidence interval 69.1–93.3), 86.8 % (1,491/1,718, 85.1–88.3) and 10.1 % (28/277, 6.4–12.9), respectively.

Conclusions

FDG-PET cancer screening with multimodalities reasonably and accurately detects existing asymptomatic cancer. However, the numbers of false negatives and false positives were not insignificant. Facilities that provide the screening should inform participants of relevant information, including the limitations of this program.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Smith RA, Brooks D, Cokkinides V et al (2013) Cancer screening in the United States, 2013: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines, current issues in cancer screening, and new guidance on cervical cancer screening and lung cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin 63:87–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. (2000) Recommendations on cancer screening in the European union. Advisory Committee on Cancer Prevention. Eur J Cancer 36: 1473–1478

  3. Hamashima C, Saito H, Nakayama T et al (2008) The standardized development method of the Japanese guidelines for cancer screening. Jpn J Clin Oncol 38:288–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hisamichi S (ed) (2001) Guidelines for cancer screening programs [in Japanese]. Japan Public Health Association

  5. Hamashima C, Nakayama T, Sagawa M et al (2009) The Japanese guideline for prostate cancer screening. Jpn J Clin Oncol 39:339–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. The Pulmonary Nodules Management Committee of the Japanese Society of CT (2013) Guidelines for the management of pulmonary nodules. Detected by low-dose CT lung cancer screening (Ver. 3). Available: http://www.jscts.org/pdf/guideline/gls3rd_english130621.pdf. Accessed 05 November 2013

  7. Ohuchi N, Ishida T, Kawai M et al (2011) Randomized controlled trial on effectiveness of ultrasonography screening for breast cancer in women aged 40–49 (J-START): research design. Jpn J Clin Oncol 41:275–277

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Proposed Decision Memo for Positron Emission Tomography (FDG) for Solid Tumors (CAG-00181R4). Available: http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-proposed-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=263. Accessed 05 November 2013

  9. The Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine (2012) FDG-PET PET/CT clinical practice guideline [in Japanese]. Available : http://www.jsnm.org/files/pdf/guideline/2012/fdgpet_guideline2012_120912.pdf. Accessed 05 November 2013

  10. Japan Radioisotope Association (2011) Questionnaire Survey on PET examination number [in Japanese]. Available: http://www.jrias.or.jp/member/pdf/201205_SIRYO_IYAKUBUKAI.pdf. Accessed 05 November 2013

  11. Schoder H, Gonen M (2007) Screening for cancer with PET and PET/CT: potential and limitations. J Nucl Med 48(Suppl 1):4S–18S

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine; Board for promoting Clinical PET (2004) Practice guidelines for PDG-PET cancer screening [in Japanese]. Jpn J Nucl Med 41:1–21

    Google Scholar 

  13. Yasuda S, Shohtsu A (1997) Cancer screening with whole-body 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography. Lancet 350:1819

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Yasuda S, Ide M, Fujii H et al (2000) Application of positron emission tomography imaging to cancer screening. Br J Cancer 83:1607–1611

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shen YY, Su CT, Chen GJ et al (2003) The value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with the additional help of tumor markers in cancer screening. Neoplasma 50:217–221

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen YK, Ding HJ, Su CT et al (2004) Application of PET and PEt/CT imaging for cancer screening. Anticancer Res 24:4103–4108

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ide M (2006) Cancer screening with FDG-PET. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 50:23–27

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Minamimoto R, Senda M, Uno K et al (2007) Performance profile of FDG-PET and PET/CT for cancer screening on the basis of a Japanese Nationwide Survey. Ann Nucl Med 21:481–498

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kojima S, Zhou B, Teramukai S et al (2007) Cancer screening of healthy volunteers using whole-body 18F-FDG-PET scans: the Nishidai clinic study. Eur J Cancer 43:1842–1848

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lee JW, Kang KW, Paeng JC et al (2009) Cancer screening using 18F-FDG PET/CT in Korean asymptomatic volunteers: a preliminary report. Ann Nucl Med 23:685–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nishizawa S, Kojima S, Teramukai S et al (2009) Prospective evaluation of whole-body cancer screening with multiple modalities including [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in a healthy population: a preliminary report. J Clin Oncol 27:1767–1773

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yamamoto K, Yamazaki H, Kuroda C et al (2010) Diagnostic validity of high-density barium sulfate in gastric cancer screening: follow-up of screenees by record linkage with the Osaka Cancer Registry. J Epidemiol 20:287–294

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Toyoda Y, Nakayama T, Kusunoki Y et al (2008) Sensitivity and specificity of lung cancer screening using chest low-dose computed tomography. Br J Cancer 98:1602–1607

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Suzuki A, Kuriyama S, Kawai M et al (2008) Age-specific interval breast cancers in Japan: estimation of the proper sensitivity of screening using a population-based cancer registry. Cancer Sci 99:2264–2267

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Yoshida Y, Sato S, Okamura C et al (2001) Evaluating the accuracy of uterine cancer screening with the regional cancer registration system. Acta Cytol 45:157–162

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Department of Cancer Control and Statistics, Japan: Osaka Cancer Registry. Available: http://www.mc.pref.osaka.jp/ocr_e/ocr/index.html. Accessed 05 November 2013

  27. Osaka cancer registry, Japan: The guide for use of population-based cancer registry data [in Japanese]. Available: http://www.mc.pref.osaka.jp/ocr/images/registration/riyotebiki.pdf. Accessed 05 November 2013

  28. Statistics with Confidence: Confidence intervals and statistical guidelines. Available: http://ktclearinghouse.ca/cebm/practise/ca/calculators/statscalc. Accessed 05 November 2013

  29. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2003) Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. BMJ 326:41–44

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Croswell JM, Kramer BS, Kreimer AR et al (2009) Cumulative incidence of false-positive results in repeated, multimodal cancer screening. Ann Fam Med 7:212–222

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Welch HG, Black WC (2010) Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 102:605–613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH et al (2001) Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med 20:21–35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Darby S (2004) Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 363:345–351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. (1998) Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals (addendum 2 to ICRP publication 53). Ann ICRP 28: 1-126

  35. Maruyama T, Iwai K, Nishizawa K et al (1996) Organ or tissue doses, effective dose and collective effective dose from X-ray diagnosis, in Japan [in Japanese]. Radioisotopes 45:761–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ghotbi N, Iwanaga M, Ohtsuru A et al (2007) Cancer screening with whole-body PET/CT for healthy asymptomatic people in Japan: re-evaluation of its test validity and radiation exposure. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 8:93–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Murano T, Minamimoto R, Senda M et al (2011) Radiation exposure and risk-benefit analysis in cancer screening using FDG-PET: results of a Japanese nationwide survey. Ann Nucl Med 25:657–666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ohata H, Kitauchi S, Yoshimura N et al (2004) Progression of chronic atrophic gastritis associated with Helicobacter pylori infection increases risk of gastric cancer. Int J Cancer 109:138–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Uemura N, Okamoto S, Yamamoto S et al (2001) Helicobacter pylori infection and the development of gastric cancer. N Engl J Med 345:784–789

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Osaka Prefecture Government, Japan: Government-designed hospitals that are capable of administering cancer care [in Japanese]. Available: http://www.pref.osaka.jp/kenkozukuri/kyoten/index.html. Accessed 05 November 2013

  41. Tanaka H, Imai Y, Hiramatsu N et al (2008) Declining incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in Osaka, Japan, from 1990 to 2003. Ann Intern Med 148:820–826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Murakami R, Tsukuma H, Kanamori S et al (1990) Natural history of colorectal polyps and the effect of polypectomy on occurrence of subsequent cancer. Int J Cancer 46:159–164

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. National Information Center on Health Services Research and Health Care Technology (NICHSR): HTA 101: Introduction to Health Technology Assessment. Available: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/hta101/ta101_c1.html. Accessed 05 November 2013

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank staff members at the Osaka Cancer Registry for allowing us to use their data.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Higashitemma Clinic, 1-1-15 Higashitemma, Kitaku, Osaka, 530-0044, Japan

    Tami Sengoku, Kaname Matsumura & Masahisa Usami

  2. Department of Health Informatics, Kyoto University School of Public Health, Konoe-cho, Yoshida, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8501, Japan

    Tami Sengoku, Yoshimitsu Takahashi & Takeo Nakayama

Authors
  1. Tami Sengoku
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kaname Matsumura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Masahisa Usami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yoshimitsu Takahashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Takeo Nakayama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tami Sengoku.

About this article

Cite this article

Sengoku, T., Matsumura, K., Usami, M. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET cancer screening in asymptomatic individuals: use of record linkage from the Osaka Cancer Registry. Int J Clin Oncol 19, 989–997 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-014-0666-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-014-0666-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation