The likelihood that people with those cancers would be alive two
years after their diagnosis was the same whether they went to a
hospital that frequently used so-called PET scans or one that used
the imaging test less often.
"I think if you're doing well and you’ve been treated, there is no
reason to seek out these scans," said lead author Dr. Mark Healy, of
the University of Michigan Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy
in Ann Arbor.
During positron emission tomography (PET) scans, radioactive liquid
is injected into a vein to show how organs are functioning.
Sometimes PET scans are partnered with computed tomography (CT)
scans.
"PET is a great resource and can have benefits for people," Healy
told Reuters Health. But some experts believe PET scans should not
be used to check for cancer recurrence before other imaging tests
have been done.
Using PET scans without good reason can lead to anxiety, wrong
diagnoses, false alarms, unnecessary procedures and higher costs,
according to the Choosing Wisely campaign from the ABIM Foundation,
created by the American Board of Internal Medicine. Choosing Wisely
aims to help doctors and patients choose treatments that are
supported by evidence.
For the new study, reported in the Journal of the National Cancer
Institute, the researchers used U.S. cancer data to see how often
PET scans are used to monitor for cancer recurrence and whether
those scans are tied to longer survival after a diagnosis of lung or
esophageal cancer.
Overall, they had information on 97,152 lung cancer patients at 859
hospitals and 4,446 esophageal cancer patients at 215 hospitals. All
were diagnosed between 2005 and 2009 and followed through 2011.
Overall, about 78 percent of lung cancer survivors and about 70
percent of esophageal cancer survivors never had a PET scan.
The researchers found wide variations in how often hospitals were
using PET scans on these patients.
Yet, about 30 percent of cancer survivors were alive two years after
their diagnosis regardless of whether their hospitals performed few
or many PET scans.
[to top of second column] |
"It does not seem there is any difference in survival for these
patients at two years," said Healy.
The findings agree with recommendations the American Society of
Clinical Oncology (ASCO) made to Choosing Wisely in 2013.
"PET and PET-CT are used to diagnose, stage and monitor how well
treatment is working," ASCO said. "Available evidence from clinical
studies suggests that using these tests to monitor for recurrence
does not improve outcomes and therefore generally is not recommended
for this purpose."
The researchers also note that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services, which oversees U.S. public insurance programs, limited
payments in 2013 to three PET scans following initial cancer
treatment.
Healy cautioned that PET scans may be necessary if doctors need to
investigate something they find on another imaging test.
"I think it’s a great technology if their doctor is following up on
an initial study," he said.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/1KHUw7G Journal of the National Cancer
Institute, online February 22, 2016.
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
|