Positive Predictive Value of Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System Categories 3 and 4 Posttreatment FDG-PET/CT in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
- 28 May 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR) in American Journal Of Neuroradiology
- Vol. 41 (6), 1070-1075
- https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.a6589
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System is a standardized reporting system intended to risk stratify patients treated for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The purpose of this study is to investigate the positive predictive value of the Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System categories 3 and 4 on posttreatment PET/CT in patients treated definitively for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified patients treated definitively for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma between 2006 and 2018. Patients whose posttreatment PET/CT scans were interpreted as Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 (suspicious) or 4 (definitive recurrence) at the primary site, regional nodes, or at distant sites were included. The reference standard was histopathology or unequivocal imaging or clinical evidence of treatment failure. The positive predictive values of Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 and 4 posttreatment PET/CT were calculated. RESULTS: Seventy-two of 128 patients with posttreatment PET/CT interpreted as Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 at the primary site, regional nodes, or distant sites were proved to have treatment failure at the suspicious sites, yielding an overall positive predictive value of 56% (95% CI, 48%?65%). The positive predictive values of Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 by subsite were as follows: primary site, 56% (44/79); regional nodes, 65% (34/52); and distant sites, 79% (42/53). All 69 patients with posttreatment PET/CT interpreted as Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 4 had true treatment failure, yielding a positive predictive value of 100% (95% CI, 96%?100%): primary site, 100% (28/28); regional nodes, 100% (32/32); and distant sites, 100% (29/29). CONCLUSIONS: The positive predictive value of Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 on posttreatment PET/CT is relatively low. Thus, Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 findings should be confirmed with tissue sampling before instituting new salvage treatment regimens to avoid unnecessary overtreatment and its associated toxicities. Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System 4 reliably indicates recurrent disease.Keywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- Negative Predictive Value of NI-RADS Category 2 in the First Posttreatment FDG-PET/CT in Head and Neck Squamous Cell CarcinomaAmerican Journal Of Neuroradiology, 2018
- ACR Neck Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (NI-RADS): A White Paper of the ACR NI-RADS CommitteeJournal of the American College of Radiology, 2018
- Neck Imaging Reporting and Data SystemMagnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics of North America, 2018
- Chapter 3 The Role of PET/CT in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and NeckSeminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI, 2017
- Clinical Practice in PET/CT for the Management of Head and Neck Squamous Cell CancerAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 2017
- PET-CT Surveillance versus Neck Dissection in Advanced Head and Neck CancerThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2016
- Implementation of a Novel Surveillance Template for Head and Neck Cancer: Neck Imaging Reporting and Data System (NI-RADS)Journal of the American College of Radiology, 2015
- Role of18F-FDG PET/CT in pre and post treatment evaluation in head and neck carcinomaWorld Journal of Radiology, 2014
- Negative Predictive Value of Surveillance PET/CT in Head and Neck Squamous Cell CancerAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology, 2013
- Deferring Planned Neck Dissection Following Chemoradiation for Stage IV Head and Neck Cancer: The Utility of PET‐CTThe Laryngoscope, 2007