Head-to-head comparison of (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis and staging of clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a prospective study

一项前瞻性研究:(18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT 与 (18)F-FDG PET/CT 在透明细胞肾细胞癌诊断和分期中的直接比较

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: This research was designed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy, lesion detection, and clinical management impact of (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT versus (18)F-FDG PET/CT in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). METHODS: Participants with confirmed or suspected ccRCC diagnoses were prospectively included in our study. All patients underwent (18)F-FAP-2286 and (18)F-FDG PET/CT. The evaluation of diagnostic performance was conducted utilizing pathology and clinical follow-up as the reference standards. The quantitative analysis included the SUVmax, TBR, FTV/MTV, and TLF/TLG. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients with initial stage (n = 20)/recurrent (n = 2) ccRCC underwent (18)F-FAP-2286 and (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Compared with (18)F-FDG PET/CT, (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT had a greater TBR for primary ccRCC lesions [2.8 (1.9–5.4) vs.1.6 (1.1–3.8); P = 0.019], whereas the SUVmax did not significantly differ [8.4 (4.7–17.2) vs.6.6 (4.9–19.4); P = 0.965]. With respect to metastatic lymph nodes, (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT had a higher SUVmax [13.7 (10.8–18.3) vs. 11.0 (7.3–16.4); P = 0.043] and TBR [10.4 (8.0-13.3) vs. 5.7 (3.4–8.7); P<0.001]. For distant metastases, the detection rates of (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT for lung metastases, liver metastases, and bone metastases were 96.9% (94/97) and 83.5% (81/97) (P = 0.002), 100% (5/5) and 80% (4/5), and 97.2% (35/36) and 80.6% (29/36) (P = 0.042), respectively. (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT revealed additional lesions, led to upstaging of T or M stage in 18.18% (4/22) of patients, resulting in treatment escalation in 4/22 patients. CONCLUSION: In this head-to-head comparison, (18)F-FAP-2286 PET/CT demonstrated superior performance for detecting primary and metastatic ccRCC lesions and provided more accurate TNM staging, significantly impacting clinical management. Interpretation should consider limitations, notably its exploratory sample size and reliance on imaging follow-up for confirming metastases. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00259-025-07650-z.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。