Role of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Gastric GIST: Predicting Malignant Potential Pre-operatively

PURPOSE: It is difficult to obtain biopsies from gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) prior to surgery because GISTs are submucoal tumors, despite being the most common nonepithelial neoplasms of the gastrointestinal tract. Unlike anatomic imaging techniques, PET-CT, which is a molecular imaging tool, can be a useful technique for assessing tumor activity and predicting the malignant potential of certain tumors. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the usefulness of PET-CT as a pre-operative prognostic factor for GISTs by analyzing the correlation between the existing post-operative prognostic factors and the maximum SUV uptake (SUVmax) of pre-operative 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) PET-CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted on 26 patients who were diagnosed with gastric GISTs and underwent surgery after being examined with pre-operative FDG PET-CT. An analysis of the correlation bewteen (i) NIH risk classfication and the Ki-67 proliferation index, which are post-operative prognostic factors, and (ii) the SUVmax of PET-CT, which is a pre-operative prognostic factor, was performed. RESULTS: There were significant correlations between (i) SUVmax and (ii) Ki-67 index, tumor size, mitotic count, and NIH risk group (r=0.854, 0.888, 0.791, and 0.756, respectively). The optimal cut-off value for SUVmax was 3.94 between "low-risk malignancy" and "high-risk malignancy" groups. The sensitivity and specificity of SUVmax for predicting the risk of malignancy were 85.7% and 94.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The SUVmax of PET-CT is associated with Ki-67 index, tumor size, mitotic count, and NIH classification. Therefore, it is believed that PET-CT is a relatively safe, non-invasive diagnostic tool for assessing malignant potential pre-operatively.

The Role of Serum Pepsinogen in Detection of Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE: This study was done to determine the usefulness of serum pepsinogen (PG) levels as a screening method for gastric cancer, and to assess the relationships between serum PG and clinicopathologic factors of gastric adenocarcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serum PG concentrations were measured in 94 subjects who were classified into (a) a control group (50 subjects) without abnormal endoscopic finding on a health checkup, or (b) a gastric cancer group (44 subjects) who had surgery at Daegu Catholic University Hospital between Nov. 2008 and May 2009. Receiver operator characteristic curves were utilized to select the most suitable test. Using different cutoff points, sensitivity and specificity were calculated. We compared preoperative serum PG levels with several clinicopathologic findings for patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: The Serum PG I:II ratio was the most useful as a screening test. The sensitivity and specificity of PG screening for gastric cancer were, respectively, 81.8% and 82%. The cut off point correlated with the type of intestinal cancer (Lauren classification; P=0.003), tumor stage (P=0.001), and gastric adenocarcinoma with peritumoral chronic atrophic gastritis (P=0.036). CONCLUSION: Serum PG levels were found to be a potentially useful screening test and to correlate with clinicopathologic factors in gastric cancer patients. But, in order to use serum PG found in a health checkup for gastric cancer as a clinical application a large scale study is recommended.