Limited research has been done previously in examining the utility of PET/CT in the preoperative staging of betel nut associated OSCC (BNOSCC). This study was conducted to evaluate the relationship between the standardized uptake values (SUV) of lymph nodes via FDG-PET/CT and their corresponding pathological specimens in betel nut chewers.
Study design:
Retrospective review.
Setting:
Single-institution academic center.
Methods:
A retrospective review of patients with BNOSCC seen at the Tipler Army Medical Center (TAMC) Head and Neck Surgery clinic from October 2004 to October 2019 was conducted. Preoperative FDG-PET/CT images were analyzed for the SUVmax of regional lymph nodes, with a node positive for malignancy defined as >3. The extent of disease spread predicted by FDG-PET/CT was then compared to the postoperative histopathological results.
Results:
Among patients with BNOSCC, FDG-PET/CT was found to significantly overpredict the extent of lymph node involvement identified on pathological analysis. Metabolic activity of lymph nodes was significantly overestimated on preoperative imaging. These findings highlight a clear discrepancy between the sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET/CT found in BNOSCC and that in non-betel nut related disease.
Conclusion:
Elevated false-positive rates for LN positivity on FDG-PET/CT have been observed in BNOSCC patients. This finding could potentially lead to upstaging, and lead to excessive, more invasive treatment courses and interventions. This is a phenomenon that Head and Neck surgeons should be cautious about when working with BNOSCC patients.
FitzmauriceCAbateDAbbasiN, et al. Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years for 29 Cancer Groups, 1990 to 2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5(12):1749-1768. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.2996
2.
MonteroPHPatelSG.Cancer of the oral cavity. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015;24(3):491-508. doi:10.1016/j.soc.2015.03.006
3.
World Health Organization International Agency for Resarch on Cancer. Betel-quid and areca-nut chewing. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risk Chem Hum. 1985;37:137-202.
4.
GuptaPCWarnakulasuriyaS.Global epidemiology of areca nut usage. Addict Biol. 2002;7(1):77-83. doi:10.1080/13556210020091437
5.
AuluckAHislopGPohCZhangLRosinM.Areca nut and betel quid chewing among South Asian immigrants to Western countries and its implications for oral cancer screening. Rural Remote Health. 2009;9(2):1118.
PobutskyAMNeriEI.Betel nut chewing in Hawai'i: is it becoming a public health problem? Historical and socio-cultural considerations. Hawaii J Med Public Health. 2012;71(1):23-26.
8.
PaulinoYCEttienneRNovotnyR, et al. Areca (betel) nut chewing practices of adults and health behaviors of their children in the freely Associated States, Micronesia: findings from the Children’s Healthy Living (CHL) program. Cancer Epidemiol. 2017;50(Pt B):234-240. doi:10.1016/j.canep.2017.07.009
9.
SharanRNMehrotraRChoudhuryYAsotraK.Association of betel nut with carcinogenesis: revisit with a clinical perspective. PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e42759. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042759
10.
World Health Organization. Regional Office for the Western P. Review of areca (betel) nut and tobacco use in the Pacific: a technical report. 2012. 9789290615699.
11.
PałaszPAdamskiŁGórska-ChrząstekMStarzyńskaAStudniarekM.Contemporary diagnostic imaging of oral squamous cell carcinoma - a review of literature. Pol J Radiol. 2017;82:193-202. doi:10.12659/PJR.900892
12.
Sarrion PerezMGBaganJVJimenezYMargaixMMarzalC.Utility of imaging techniques in the diagnosis of oral cancer. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43(9):1880-1894. doi:10.1016/j.jcms.2015.07.037
13.
WolffKDFollmannMNastA.The diagnosis and treatment of oral cavity cancer. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109(48):829-835. doi:10.3238/arztebl.2012.0829
14.
CetinBAtaseverTAkdemirUO, et al. The role of positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in nodal staging of clinical and radiological N(0) head and neck cancers. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2013;270(8):2307-2313. doi:10.1007/s00405-012-2337-4
15.
LonneuxMHamoirMReychlerH, et al. Positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose improves staging and patient management in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter prospective study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(7):1190-1195. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.24.6298
16.
NguyenALuginbuhlACognettiD, et al. Effectiveness of PET/CT in the preoperative evaluation of neck disease. Laryngoscope. 2014;124(1):159-164. doi:10.1002/lary.24329
17.
RohJLParkJPKimJS, et al. 18F fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with negative neck palpation findings: a prospective study. Radiology. 2014;271(1):153-161. doi:10.1148/radiol.13131470
18.
StoeckliSJHaerleSKStrobelKHaileSRHanyTFSchuknechtB.Initial staging of the neck in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a comparison of CT, PET/CT, and ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology. Head Neck. 2012;34(4):469-476. doi:10.1002/hed.21764
19.
ShahJP.Cervical lymph node metastases–diagnostic, therapeutic, and prognostic implications. Oncology. 1990;4(10):61-69.
20.
SnowGBPatelPLeemansCRTiwariR.Management of cervical lymph nodes in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 1992;249(4):187-194. doi:10.1007/BF00178467
21.
SunRTangXYangYZhangC.(18)FDG-PET/CT for the detection of regional nodal metastasis in patients with head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis. Oral Oncol. 2015;51(4):314-320. doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2015.01.004
22.
StuckensenTKovacsAFAdamsSBaumRP.Staging of the neck in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinomas: a prospective comparison of PET, ultrasound, CT and MRI. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2000;28(6):319-324. doi:10.1054/jcms.2000.0172
23.
PoharSBrownRNewmanNKoniarczykMHsuJFeiglinD.What does PET imaging add to conventional staging of head and neck cancer patients?Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68(2):383-387. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.12.044
24.
SchwartzDLFordERajendranJ, et al. FDG-PET/CT imaging for preradiotherapy staging of head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61(1):129-136. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.03.040
25.
AdamsSBaumRPStuckensenTBitterKHörG.Prospective comparison of 18F-FDG PET with conventional imaging modalities (CT, MRI, US) in lymph node staging of head and neck cancer. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25(9):1255-1260. doi:10.1007/s002590050293
26.
HoangJKVankaJLudwigBJGlastonburyCM.Evaluation of cervical lymph nodes in head and neck cancer with CT and MRI: tips, traps, and a systematic approach. Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200(1):W17-W25. doi:10.2214/AJR.12.8960
27.
FletcherJWDjulbegovicBSoaresHP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(3):480-508. doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.047787
28.
TantiwongkosiBYuFKanardAMillerFR.Role of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in pre and post treatment evaluation in head and neck carcinoma. World J Radiol. 2014;6(5):177-191. doi:10.4329/wjr.v6.i5.177
29.
FlemingAJJrSmithSPJrPaulCM, et al. Impact of [18F]-2-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography on previously untreated head and neck cancer patients. Laryngoscope. 2007;117(7):1173-1179. doi:10.1097/MLG.0b013e31805d017b
30.
SyedRBomanjiJBNagabhushanN, et al. Impact of combined (18)F-FDG PET/CT in head and neck tumours. Br J Cancer. 2005;92(6):1046-1050. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6602464
31.
EndoKOriuchiNHiguchiT, et al. PET and PET/ct using 18F-FDG in the diagnosis and management of cancer patients. Int J Clin Oncol. 2006;11(4):286-296. doi:10.1007/s10147-006-0595-0
32.
BranstetterBFBlodgettTMZimmerLA, et al. Head and neck malignancy: is PET/CT more accurate than PET or CT alone?Radiology. 2005;235(2):580-586. doi:10.1148/radiol.2352040134
33.
AdamsMCTurkingtonTGWilsonJMWongTZ.A systematic review of the factors affecting accuracy of SUV measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(2):310-320. doi:10.2214/AJR.10.4923
34.
FukuiMBBlodgettTMSnydermanCH, et al. Combined PET-CT in the head and neck: part 2. Diagnostic uses and pitfalls of oncologic imaging. Radiographics. 2005;25(4):913-930. doi:10.1148/rg.254045136
35.
ToyaRSaitoTMatsuyamaT, et al. Diagnostic value of FDG-PET/CT for the identification of extranodal extension in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 2020;40(4):2073-2077. doi:10.21873/anticanres.14165
36.
HeronDEAndradeRSBeriwalSSmithRP.PET-CT in radiation oncology: the impact on diagnosis, treatment planning, and assessment of treatment response. Am J Clin Oncol. 2008;31(4):352-362. doi:10.1097/COC.0b013e318162f150
37.
KoshyMPaulinoACHowellRSchusterDHalkarRDavisLW.F-18 FDG PET-CT fusion in radiotherapy treatment planning for head and neck cancer. Head Neck. 2005;27(6):494-502. doi:10.1002/hed.20179
38.
HaPKHdeibAGoldenbergDJaceneHPatelPKochWCalifanoJCummingsCWFlintPWWahlRTufanoRP. The role of positron emission tomography and computed tomography fusion in the management of early-stage and advanced-stage primary head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Jan;132(1):12-6. doi: 10.1001/archotol.132.1.12. PMID: 16415423.
39.
ZanationAMSuttonDKCouchMEWeisslerMCShockleyWWShoresCG.Use, accuracy, and implications for patient management of [18F]-2-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission/computerized tomography for head and neck tumors. Laryngoscope. 2005;115(7):1186-1190. doi:10.1097/01.MLG.0000163763.89647.9F
40.
SchöderHYeungHWGonenMKrausDLarsonSM.Head and neck cancer: clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology. 2004;231(1):65-72. doi:10.1148/radiol.2311030271
41.
GuptaNCGraeberGMBishopHA.Comparative efficacy of positron emission tomography with fluorodeoxyglucose in evaluation of small (<<1 3 cm), intermediate (1 to and large (>3 cm) lymph node lesions. Chest. 2000;117(3):773-778. doi:10.1378/chest.117.3.773
42.
AlaviAGuptaNAlberiniJL, et al. Positron emission tomography imaging in nonmalignant thoracic disorders. Semin Nucl Med. 2002;32(4):293-321. doi:10.1053/snuc.2002.127291
43.
KubotaRYamadaSKubotaKIshiwataKTamahashiNIdoT.Intratumoral distribution of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in vivo: high accumulation in macrophages and granulation tissues studied by microautoradiography. J Nucl Med. 1992;33(11):1972-1980.
44.
LordGALimCKWarnakulasuriyaSPetersTJ.Chemical and analytical aspects of areca nut. Addict Biol. 2002;7(1):99-102. doi:10.1080/13556210120091455
45.
WangCCLinHLWeySPJanTR.Areca-nut extract modulates antigen-specific immunity and augments inflammation in ovalbumin-sensitized mice. Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol. 2011;33(2):315-322. doi:10.3109/08923973.2010.507208
46.
ShafiqueKMirzaSSVartP, et al. Areca nut chewing and systemic inflammation: evidence of a common pathway for systemic diseases. J Inflamm. 2012;9(1):22. doi:10.1186/1476-9255-9-22
47.
CaoYShiYXChenJO, et al. Serum C-reactive protein as an important prognostic variable in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Tumour Biol. 2012;33(4):1039-1044. doi:10.1007/s13277-012-0337-z
48.
YenAMFChiuYHChenLS, et al. A population-based study of the association between betel-quid chewing and the metabolic syndrome in men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;83(5):1153-1160. doi:10.1093/ajcn/83.5.1153
49.
LinWYChiuTYLeeLTLinCCHuangCYHuangKC.Betel nut chewing is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality in Taiwanese men. Am J Clin Nutr. 2008;87(5):1204-1211. doi:10.1093/ajcn/87.5.1204
50.
JavedFBello CorreraFOChotaiMTappuniARAlmasK.Systemic conditions associated with areca nut usage: a literature review. Scand J Public Health. 2010;38(8):838-844. doi:10.1177/1403494810379291
51.
LeeBJChanMYHsiaoHYChangCHHsuLPLinPT.Relationship of oxidative stress, inflammation, and the risk of metabolic syndrome in patients with oral cancer. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2018;2018:9303094. doi:10.1155/2018/9303094
52.
UcarEYalcinHKavvasogluGHIlhanG.Correlations between the maximum standard uptake value of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and laboratory parameters before and after treatment in patients with lymphoma. Chin Med J. 2018;131(15):1776-1779. doi:10.4103/0366-6999.237392
53.
MorandGBVitalDGKuduraK, et al. Maximum Standardized Uptake Value (SUV(max)) of Primary Tumor Predicts Occult Neck Metastasis in Oral Cancer. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):11817. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-30111-7
