A Quality Initiative of the Program in Evidence-Based Care (PEBC), Cancer Care Ontario (CCO)

Interpretation of Evidence for Recommendation 1 Despite the lack of comparison with pelvic MRI, which is considered the current standard in the diagnostic work-up of anal canal cancer, PET or PET/CT showed high sensitivity in visualizing the primary tumour and identifying involved lymph nodes as compared with CT. [...] Recommendation 2 There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of PET or PET/CT in the assessment of treatment response. [...] Interpretation of Evidence for Recommendation 2 Owing to the small number of studies evaluating the role of PET or PET/CT in the assessment of response after chemoradiotherapy and the inconsistent timing of assessment, the evidence is currently insufficient to support the use of PET or PET/CT in this setting. [...] Interpretation of Evidence for Recommendation 3 Owing to small sample size as well as the lack of data on the frequency and timing of routine follow-up, the evidence is currently insufficient to support the use of PET or PET/CT in this setting. [...] The purpose of this report is to develop an evidentiary base to inform recommendations with respect to the role of PET or PET/CT in the staging, response evaluation, and follow-up of anal canal cancer.