FDG-PET/CT for pretherapeutic lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer: A tailored approach to the ESTS/ESMO guideline workflow.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES\nIn patients with NSCLC, current ESTS and ESMO guidelines recommend invasive lymph node (LN) staging with EBUS-TBNA even if FDG-PET/CT is negative for mediastinal LNs if at least one of three risk factors is present (cN1, non-peripheral primary or primary >3\u202fcm). Modified workflows to avoid unnecessary invasive procedures were evaluated.\n\n\nMATERIALS AND METHODS\nMonocentric retrospective analysis of pretherapeutic FDG-PET/CT in 247 patients with NSCLC (62 % male; age, 68 [43-88] years) using an analog or digital PET/CT scanner. PET windowing was standardized. LNs were positive if LN uptake\u202f>\u202fmediastinal blood pool or short axis >10\u202fmm. Surgery or EBUS-TBNA served as reference for diagnostic accuracy per LN station. In all patients with negative mediastinal LNs by PET/CT, LN histology from surgery was available.\n\n\nRESULTS\nAmong 700\u202fL\u202fN stations analyzed, 180 were malignant. Sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT per LN station were 93 % and 71 %. Following current guidelines, 76 patients with mediastinal negative PET/CT required confirmatory invasive staging. Only 5/76 patients had unexpected pN2 (all had adenocarcinoma). In a modified approach, confirmatory invasive staging was confined to patients with mediastinal negative PET/CT who showed all three risk factors. Using this modification, EBUS-TBNA could have been omitted in 62 (82 %) of the 76 patients who required EBUS-TBNA based on current recommendation. Among these 62 patients, only one patient had unsuspected pN2 (single-level) while the remaining 61 of 62 omitted EBUS-TBNA were deemed unnecessary because mediastinal LNs were confirmed to be negative. No multi-level pN2 would have been missed.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nIn the current analysis, 82 % of EBUS-TBNA procedures in patients with mediastinal negative PET/CT could have been omitted by modifying the current guideline workflow as proposed (i.e., restricting EBUS-TBNA in patients with cN0/1 to those with all three risk factors). This was consistent with different PET/CT scanners. Prospective confirmation is required.