nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

01.07.2011 | Original Article

Prognostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology

verfasst von: Mathieu Hatt, Dimitris Visvikis, Nidal M. Albarghach, Florent Tixier, Olivier Pradier, Catherine Cheze-le Rest

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 7/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) image-derived parameters, such as standardized uptake value (SUV), functional tumour length (TL) and tumour volume (TV) or total lesion glycolysis (TLG), may be useful for determining prognosis in patients with oesophageal carcinoma. The objectives of this work were to investigate the prognostic value of these indices in oesophageal cancer patients undergoing combined chemoradiotherapy treatment and the impact of TV delineation strategies.

Methods

A total of 45 patients were retrospectively analysed. Tumours were delineated on pretreatment ¹⁸F-FDG scans using adaptive threshold and automatic (fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian, FLAB) methodologies. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUV_max), SUV_peak, SUV_mean, TL, TV and TLG were computed. The prognostic value of each parameter for overall survival was investigated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models for univariate and multivariate analyses, respectively.

Results

Large differences were observed between methodologies (from −140 to +50% for TV). SUV measurements were not significant prognostic factors for overall survival, whereas TV, TL and TLG were, irrespective of the segmentation strategy. After multivariate analysis including standard tumour staging, only TV (p < 0.002) and TL (p = 0.042) determined using FLAB were independent prognostic factors.

Conclusion

Whereas no SUV measurement was a significant prognostic factor, TV, TL and TLG were significant prognostic factors for overall survival, irrespective of the delineation methodology. Only functional TV and TL derived using FLAB were independent prognostic factors, highlighting the need for accurate and robust PET tumour delineation tools for oncology applications.

Falk GW. Risk factors for esophageal cancer development. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2009;18(3):469–85.PubMedCrossRef

Flamen P, Lerut A, Van Cutsem E, De Wever W, Peeters M, Stroobants S, et al. Utility of positron emission tomography for the staging of patients with potentially operable esophageal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3202–10.PubMed

Heeren PA, Jager PL, Bongaerts F, van Dullemen H, Sluiter W, Plukker JT. Detection of distant metastases in esophageal cancer with (18)F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2004;45:980–7.PubMed

van Vliet EP, Heijenbrok-Kal MH, Hunink MG, Kuipers EJ, Siersema PD. Staging investigations for oesophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 2008;98(3):547–57.PubMedCrossRef

Kim TJ, Kim HY, Lee KW, Kim MS. Multimodality assessment of esophageal cancer: preoperative staging and monitoring of response to therapy. Radiographics 2009;29(2):403–2.PubMedCrossRef

Chuang HH, Macapinlac HA. The evolving role of PET-CT in the management of esophageal cancer. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;53(2):201–9.PubMed

MacManus M, Nestle U, Rosenzweig KE, Carrio I, Messa C, Belohlavek O, et al. Use of PET and PET/CT for radiation therapy planning: IAEA expert report 2006–2007. Radiother Oncol 2009;91(1):85–94.PubMedCrossRef

Grégoire V, Haustermans K, Geets X, Roeis S, Lonneux M. PET-based treatment planning in radiotherapy: a new standard? J Nucl Med 2007;48(S1):68S–77.PubMed

Howard A, Mehta MP, Ritter MA, Bradley KA, Tome WA, Chappell RJ et al. The value of PET/CT in gross tumor volume delineation in lung and esophagus cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;60(Suppl):S536–7.CrossRef

10.

Choi JY, Jang HY, Shim YM, Kim K, Lee KS, Lee KH, et al. 18F-FDG PET in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma undergoing curative surgery: prognostic implications. J Nucl Med 2004;45(11):1843–50.PubMed

11.

Mamede M, Abreu-E-Lima P, Oliva MR, Nosé V, Mamon H, Gerbaudo VH. FDG-PET/CT tumor segmentation-derived indices of metabolic activity to assess response to neoadjuvant therapy and progression-free survival in esophageal cancer: correlation with histopathology results. Am J Clin Oncol 2007;30(4):377–88.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Hyun SH, Choi JY, Shim YM, Kim K, Lee SJ, Cho YS, et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume measured by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2010;17:115–22.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Hong D, Lunagomez S, Kim EE, Lee JH, Bresalier RS, Swisher SG, et al. Value of baseline positron emission tomography for predicting overall survival in patient with nonmetastatic esophageal or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. Cancer 2005;104:1620–6.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Blackstock AW, Farmer MR, Lovato J, Mishra G, Melin SA, Oaks T, et al. A prospective evaluation of the impact of 18-F-fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography staging on survival for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;64:455–60.PubMedCrossRef

15.

van Westreenen HL, Plukker JT, Cobben DC, Verhoogt CJ, Groen H, Jager PL. Prognostic value of the standardized uptake value in esophageal cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;185(2):436–40.PubMed

16.

Omloo JM, Sloof GW, Boellaard R, Hoekstra OS, Jager PL, van Dulleman HM, et al. Importance of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and endoscopic ultrasonography parameters in predicting survival following surgery for esophageal cancer. Endoscopy 2008;40(6):464–71.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Kato H, Nakajima M, Sohda M, Tanaka N, Inose T, Miyazaki T, et al. The clinical application of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to predict survival in patients with operable esophageal cancer. Cancer 2009;115:3196–203.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Cheze-Le Rest C, Metges JP, Teyton P, Jestin-Le Tallec V, Lozac’h P, Volant A, et al. Prognostic value of initial fluorodeoxyglucose-PET in esophageal cancer: a prospective study. Nucl Med Commun 2008;29:628–35.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS. Maximum standardized uptake values on positron emission tomography of esophageal cancer predicts stage, tumor biology, and survival. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;82:391–5.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Rizk N, Downey RJ, Akhurst T, Gonen M, Bains MS, Larson S, et al. Preoperative 18[F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography standardized uptake values predict survival after esophageal adenocarcinoma resection. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;81:1076–81.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Yendamuri S, Swisher SG, Correa AM, Hofstetter W, Ajani JA, Francis A, et al. Esophageal tumor length is independently associated with long-term survival. Cancer 2009;115:508–16.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Roedl JB, Harisinghani MG, Colen RR, Fischman AJ, Blake MA, Mathisen DJ, et al. Assessment of treatment response and recurrence in esophageal carcinoma based on tumor length and standardized uptake value on positron emission tomography-computed tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 2008;86(4):1131–8.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Nestle U, Kremp S, Schaefer-Schuler A, Sebastian-Welsch C, Hellwig D, Rübe C, et al. Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2005;46(8):1342–8.PubMed

24.

Hatt M, Cheze-le Rest C, Descourt P, Dekker A, De Ruysscher D, Oellers M, et al. Accurate automatic delineation of heterogeneous functional volumes in positron emission tomography for oncology applications. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2010;77:301–8.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, Mazumdar M, Macpinlac HA, Finn RD, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging. The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2:159–71.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Velasquez LM, Boellaard R, Kollia G, Hayes W, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA, et al. Repeatability of 18F-FDG PET in a multicenter phase I study of patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies. J Nucl Med 2009;50(10):1646–54.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Hatt M, Cheze le Rest C, Turzo A, Roux C, Visvikis D. A fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian segmentation approach for volume determination in PET. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2009;28(6):881–93.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–10.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1958;53:457–81.CrossRef

30.

Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978;8(4):283–98.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed. New York: Springer; 2002.CrossRef

32.

Cox DR. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc B 1972;34(2):187–220.

33.

van Heijl M, Omloo JM, van Berge Henegouwen MI, van Lanschot JJ, Sloof GW, Boellaard R. Influence of ROI definition, partial volume correction and SUV normalization on SUV-survival correlation in oesophageal cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2010;31(7):652–8.PubMed

34.

Himeno S, Yasuda S, Shimada H, Tajima T, Makuuchi H. Evaluation of esophageal cancer by positron emission tomography. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2002;32:340–6.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Fukunaga T, Okazumi S, Koide Y, Isono K, Imazeki K. Evaluation of esophageal cancers using fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET. J Nucl Med 1998;39:1002–7.PubMed

36.

Taylor MD, Smith PW, Brix WK, Wick MR, Theodosakis N, Swenson BR, et al. Correlations between selected tumor markers and fluorodeoxyglucose maximal standardized uptake values in esophageal cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009;35:699–705.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Swisher S, Erasmus J, Maish M, Correa AM, Macapinlac H, Ajani JA, et al. 2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography imaging is predictive of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer 2004;101:1776–85.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Zhong X, Yu J, Zhang B, Li D, Han A, Song P, et al. Using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to estimate the length of gross tumor in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;73(1):136–41.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Tylski P, Stute S, Grotus N, Doyeux K, Hapdey S, Gardin I, et al. Comparative assessment of methods for estimating tumor volume and standardized uptake value in (18)F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2010;51(2):268–76.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Xie P, Yue JB, Zhao HX, Sun XD, Kong L, Fu Z, et al. Prognostic value of (18)F-FDG PET-CT metabolic index for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2010;136(6):883–9.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Cazaentre T, Morschhauser F, Vermandel M, Betrouni N, Prangère T, Steinling M, et al. Pre-therapy 18F-FDG PET quantitative parameters help in predicting the response to radioimmunotherapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37(3):494–504.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Hatt M, Cheze Le Rest C, Aboagye EO, et al. Reproducibility of 18F-FDG and 3′-deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine PET tumor volume measurements. J Nucl Med 2010;51(9):1368–76.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology
verfasst von: Mathieu Hatt
Dimitris Visvikis
Nidal M. Albarghach
Florent Tixier
Olivier Pradier
Catherine Cheze-le Rest
Publikationsdatum: 01.07.2011
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 7/2011
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-011-1755-7

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2011

86Y-DOTATOC uptake in red marrow is not routinely visible

Gastrin-releasing peptide receptor-based targeting using bombesin analogues is superior to metabolism-based targeting using choline for in vivo imaging of human prostate cancer xenografts

68Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT and somatostatin receptor (sst1–sst5) expression in normal human tissue: correlation of sst2 mRNA and SUVmax

18F-FDG PET/CT imaging of an anti-CTLA-4 antibody-associated autoimmune pancolitis

[68Ga]NODAGA-RGD for imaging αvβ3 integrin expression

G. T. Krishnamurthy and S. Krishnamurthy: Nuclear hepatology: a textbook of hepatobiliary diseases (2nd edition)