Evidence Hub

Predicting Tumor Recurrence with Early 18F-FDG PET-CT After Thermal and Non-Thermal Ablation

Narayanan G, Gentile NT, Schiro BJ, Gandhi RT, Peña CS, van der Lei S, Dijkstra M

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2025

132 participants

Abstract

The purpose was to determine the ability of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scans performed within 24 h of percutaneous image-guided ablation of primary and metastatic malignancies to predict ablation effectiveness and local tumor progression (LTP). This single-center retrospective review included patients who underwent image guided ablation (microwave ablation (MWA), cryoablation, or irreversible electroporation (IRE)) between August 2018 and February 2024 for primary and metastatic malignancies. The primary outcome measure encompassed correlating post-ablation 18F-FDG PET-CT findings with LTP development per tumor, assessed using the chi-square test. The secondary outcome measure was local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) per tumor, evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and potential confounders were identified in multivariable analysis utilizing Cox proportional hazards regression models. A total of 132 patients, who underwent 159 procedures for 224 tumors, were included. During follow-up, LTP developed in 120 out of 224 tumors (53.6%). The presence of residual nodular 18F-FDG avidity on PET-CT within 24 h after the ablation significantly correlated with the development of LTP at follow-up imaging (p < 0.001). The positive predictive value of nodular 18F-FDG avidity was 86.7%. In multivariable analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) for 18F-FDG avidity was 2.355 (95% CI 1.614-2.647; p < 0.001). The…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 132 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free