Abstract
All women, during their lifetime, are at risk of develo** some form of gynecologic malignancy. The role of FDG-PET/CT has become more established in the management of gynecologic malignancies in the last decade. In this article, we will review the role of FDG-PET/CT in endometrial, cervical, ovarian, and vaginal cancer, by highlighting its strengths and limitations. While the role in initial or pre-operative staging for FDG-PET/CT is controversial, it allows noninvasive detection of equivocal or distant metastases, may alter stage and prognosis, and can guide or help eliminate unnecessary interventions that may not be beneficial. FDG-PET/CT is a useful adjunct to traditional staging with MR and CT.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Avril N, Gourtsoyianni S, Reznek R (2011) Gynecological cancers. Methods Mol Biol 727:171–189
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2016) Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 66:7–30
Plaxton N, Polsani A, Halkar R, Godette K, Barron B (2012) FDG PET/CT utility in gynecologic malignancies: a comprehensive interactive review of anatomy, pathways of metastatic spread and scan findings. J Nucl Med 53:1067
Nogami Y, Iida M, Banno K, et al. (2014) Application of FDG-PET in cervical cancer and endometrial cancer: utility and future prospects. Anticancer Res 34:585–592
Rockall AG, Cross S, Flanagan S, Moore E, Avril N (2012) The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynaecological cancers. Cancer Imaging 12:49–65
Sharma P, Kumar R, Singh H, et al. (2012) Carcinoma endometrium: role of 18-FDG PET/CT for detection of suspected recurrence. Clin Nucl Med 37:649–655
Lioupis M, Syrmos N (2016) Nuclear Medicine and its promising applications in gynecological cancers. Hell J Nucl Med 19:63
Micco M, Sala E, Lakhman Y, Hricak H, Vargas HA (2014) Role of imaging in the pretreatment evaluation of common gynecological cancers. Womens Health (Lond) 10:299–321
NCCN Practice Guidelines Narrative Summary of Indications for FDG PET and PET/ CT. 2/14/2016 ed2016.
Prat J (2015) Oncology FCoG. FIGO’s staging classification for cancer of the ovary, fallopian tube, and peritoneum: abridged republication. J Gynecol Oncol 26:87–89
Kitajima K, Murakami K, Kaji Y, Sugimura K (2010) Spectrum of FDG PET/CT findings of uterine tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:737–743
Park JY, Kim EN, Kim DY, et al. (2008) Comparison of the validity of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the preoperative evaluation of patients with uterine corpus cancer. Gynecol Oncol 108:486–492
Picchio M, Mangili G, Samanes Gajate AM, et al. (2010) High-grade endometrial cancer: value of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT in preoperative staging. Nucl Med Commun 31:506–512
Kang SY, Cheon GJ, Lee M, et al. (2017) Prediction of recurrence by preoperative intratumoral FDG uptake heterogeneity in endometrioid endometrial cancer. Transl Oncol 10:178–183
Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F, et al. (2008) Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:1707–1716
Freeman SJ, Aly AM, Kataoka MY, et al. (2012) The revised FIGO staging system for uterine malignancies: implications for MR imaging. Radiographics 32:1805–1827
Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Kaji Y, Sugimura K (2009) Accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with uterine cancer. Eur Radiol 19:1529–1536
Nakahara T, Fujii H, Ide M, et al. (2001) F-18 FDG uptake in endometrial cancer. Clin Nucl Med 26:82–83
Chander S, Meltzer CC, McCook BM (2002) Physiologic uterine uptake of FDG during menstruation demonstrated with serial combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Clin Nucl Med 27:22–24
Lerman H, Metser U, Grisaru D, et al. (2004) Normal and abnormal 18F-FDG endometrial and ovarian uptake in pre- and postmenopausal patients: assessment by PET/CT. J Nucl Med 45:266–271
Peltomaki P, Butzow R (2011) Pathogenesis of endometriosis and its relationship to gynecological cancers. Epigenomics 3:689–690
Saga T, Higashi T, Ishimori T, et al. (2003) Clinical value of FDG-PET in the follow up of post-operative patients with endometrial cancer. Ann Nucl Med 17:197–203
Survival rates for Ovarian Cancer by Stage. 2016.
Tjalma WA, Carp L, De Beeck BO (2004) False-positive positron emission tomographic scan and computed tomography for recurrent vaginal cancer: pitfalls of modern imaging techniques. Gynecol Oncol 92:726–728
Fenchel S, Grab D, Nuessle K, et al. (2002) Asymptomatic adnexal masses: correlation of FDG PET and histopathologic findings. Radiology 223:780–788
Castellucci P, Perrone AM, Picchio M, et al. (2007) Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology. Nucl Med Commun 28:589–595
Grab D, Flock F, Stohr I, et al. (2000) Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Gynecol Oncol 77:454–459
Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kawahara K, et al. (2004) Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:227–233
Havrilesky LJ, Kulasingam SL, Matchar DB, Myers ER (2005) FDG-PET for management of cervical and ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 97:183–191
Woodward PJ, Hosseinzadeh K, Saenger JS (2004) From the archives of the AFIP. Radiographics 24:225–246
Keidar Z, Amit A, Lowenstein L, Israel O (2015) The role of FDG-PET/CT in predicting secondary optimal debuling in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. J Nucl Med 56:1346
Miller DS, Spirtos NM, Ballon SC, et al. (1992) Critical reassessment of second-look exploratory laparotomy for epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Minimal diagnostic and therapeutic value in patients with persistent cancer. Cancer 69:502–510
Kubik-Huch RA, Dorffler W, von Schulthess GK, et al. (2000) Value of (18F)-FDG positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Eur Radiol 10:761–767
Schwarz JK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Delbeke D (2009) The role of 18F-FDG PET in assessing therapy response in cancer of the cervix and ovaries. J Nucl Med 50:64S–73S
Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, et al. (2005) Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:7445–7453
Rose PG, Faulhaber P, Miraldi F, Abdul-Karim FW (2001) Positive emission tomography for evaluating a complete clinical response in patients with ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma: correlation with second-look laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 82:17–21
Markowitz LE, Unger ER, Saraiya M (2009) Primary and secondary prevention of cervical cancer–opportunities and challenges. J Natl Cancer Inst 101:439–440
Togashi K, Morikawa K, Kataoka ML, Konishi J (1998) Cervical cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 8:391–397
Dehdashti F, Siegel BA (2010) Gynecological tumors. In: Delbeke D, Israel O (eds) Hybrid PET/CT and SPECT/CT imaging: a teaching file. New York: Springer, pp 383–408
Pandit-Taskar N (2005) Oncologic imaging in gynecologic malignancies. J Nucl Med 46:1842–1850
Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F (2001) Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 19:3745–3749
Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. (2010) Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis. J Clin Oncol 28:2108–2113
Lukka H, Hirte H, Fyles A, et al. (2002) Concurrent cisplatin-based chemotherapy plus radiotherapy for cervical cancer–a meta-analysis. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 14:203–212
About Gynecologic Cancers—Foundation for Women’s Cancer. 2017. at http://www.foundationforwomenscancer.org/about-gynecologic-cancers/.)
Bodurka-Bevers D, Morris M, Eifel PJ, et al. (2000) Posttherapy surveillance of women with cervical cancer: an outcomes analysis. Gynecol Oncol 78:187–193
Jacobs AJ, Faris C, Perez CA, et al. (1986) Short-term persistence of carcinoma of the uterine cervix after radiation. An indicator of long-term prognosis. Cancer 57:944–950
Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW (2007) Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma. JAMA 298:2289–2295
Lamoreaux WT, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, et al. (2005) FDG-PET evaluation of vaginal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:733–737
Koh WJ, Greer BE, Abu-Rustum NR, et al. (2017) Vulvar cancer, version 1.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 15:92–120
Cohn DE, Dehdashti F, Gibb RK, et al. (2002) Prospective evaluation of positron emission tomography for the detection of groin node metastases from vulvar cancer. Gynecol Oncol 85:179–184
Vaginal Cancer Treatment (PDQ(R)): Health Professional Version. PDQ Cancer Information Summaries. Bethesda (MD)2002.
Robertson NL, Hricak H, Sonoda Y, et al. (2016) The impact of FDG-PET/CT in the management of patients with vulvar and vaginal cancer. Gynecol Oncol 140:420–424
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Esma A. Akin, M.D. declares that she has no conflict of interest. Elsa Stephen Kuhl, M.D. declares that she has no conflict of interest. Robert K. Zeman, M.D. declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Akin, E.A., Kuhl, E.S. & Zeman, R.K. The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynecologic imaging: an updated guide to interpretation and challenges. Abdom Radiol 43, 2474–2486 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1441-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-017-1441-8