Brain, Vol. 124, No. 11, 2223-2231,
November 2001
© 2001 Oxford University Press
The role of [18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose-PET scanning in the diagnosis of paraneoplastic neurological disorders
1 National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, 2 Clinical PET Centre, St Thomas' Hospital, 3 Department of Neurology, Guy's Hospital, 4 Institute of Nuclear Medicine, UCL Medical School and 5 Department of Neuroimmunology, Institute of Neurology, London, UK
Correspondence to:
Dr Jeremy Rees, Institute of Neurology, Queen Square, London WC1N 3BG, UK E-mail: j.rees{at}ion.ucl.ac.uk
The detection of an occult tumour in a patient with a suspected paraneoplastic neurological disorder (PND) may be difficult because of the limitations of conventional imaging techniques. [18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose-PET (FDG-PET) can visualize a small tumour anywhere within the body. We retrospectively reviewed the case notes of 43 unselected patients with suspected PND referred for FDG-PET scanning to determine how useful this technique was when conventional imaging was negative. All patients had undergone standard radiological investigations and bronchoscopy (where appropriate) prior to PET scanning. There were discrete areas of hypermetabolism suggestive of malignancy (positive) in 16 patients (37%). A tissue diagnosis of cancer was subsequently made in seven patients (two at post-mortem), further radiological studies were suggestive of cancer in one patient, one patient subsequently presented with a metastatic deposit which was biopsied, and four patients died shortly afterwards without a post-mortem. In three patients, subsequent investigations were negative for cancer. Serum anti-neuronal antibodies were present in 43% and CSF oligoclonal bands were present in 46% of patients with positive PET scans compared with 16 and 26%, respectively, in PET-negative patients, but this was not significant. Only one patient with a negative scan has been diagnosed subsequently as having malignancy on prolonged follow-up. These findings confirm that FDG-PET scanning is a useful technique in the detection of small tumours in patients with suspected PND. False positives and false negatives do occur, but at a sufficiently low frequency to justify the clinical usefulness of this technique.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. R. Keane Bilateral Ocular Paralysis: Analysis of 31 Inpatients Arch Neurol, February 1, 2007; 64(2): 178 - 180. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M Schott Limbic encephalitis: a clinician's guide Practical Neurology, June 1, 2006; 6(3): 143 - 153. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J H Rees Paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration: new insights into imaging and immunology J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, April 1, 2006; 77(4): 427 - 427. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. W. de Beukelaar and P. A. S. Smitt Managing paraneoplastic neurological disorders. Oncologist, March 1, 2006; 11(3): 292 - 305. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P J Ell The contribution of PET/CT to improved patient management Br. J. Radiol., January 1, 2006; 79(937): 32 - 36. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P M Candler, P E Hart, M Barnett, R Weil, and J H Rees A follow up study of patients with paraneoplastic neurological disease in the United Kingdom J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, October 1, 2004; 75(10): 1411 - 1415. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Younes-Mhenni, M. F. Janier, L. Cinotti, J. C. Antoine, F. Tronc, V. Cottin, P. J. Ternamian, P. Trouillas, and J. Honnorat FDG-PET improves tumour detection in patients with paraneoplastic neurological syndromes Brain, October 1, 2004; 127(10): 2331 - 2338. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Linke, M. Schroeder, T. Helmberger, and R. Voltz Antibody-positive paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes: Value of CT and PET for tumor diagnosis Neurology, July 27, 2004; 63(2): 282 - 286. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J H Rees Paraneoplastic syndromes: when to suspect, how to confirm, and how to manage J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, June 1, 2004; 75(suppl_2): ii43 - ii50. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. D. Wilkinson, M. J. Fulham, R. N.S. Heard, B. C. McCaughan, and S. W. McCarthy FDG-PET in paraneoplastic neuropathy Neurology, May 27, 2003; 60(10): 1668 - 1668. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M N Maisey Overview of clinical PET Br. J. Radiol., November 1, 2002; 75(90009): S1 - 5. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 FDG-PET Scanning for Diagnosing Paraneoplastic Neurologic Disorders Journal Watch Neurology, January 10, 2002; 2002(110): 8 - 8. [Full Text]
|
|