nach oben

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Erschienen in:

01.10.2013 | Original Article

Clinical significance of VEGFR-2 and ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT SUVmax pretreatment score in predicting the long-term outcome of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy

verfasst von: Claudio V. Sole, Felipe A. Calvo, Emilio Alvarez, Isabel Peligros, Pilar Garcia-Alfonso, Carlos Ferrer, Enrique Ochoa, Rafael Herranz, Jose L. Carreras

Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Ausgabe 11/2013

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR-2), epidermal growth factor receptor-1 (EGFR), and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) stimulate key processes involved in tumor progression and are important targets for cancer drugs. ¹⁸F-FDG maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) is a marker of tumor metabolic activity. The purpose of this study was to measure SUVmax combined with VEGFR-2, EGFR and COX-2 proteins in pretreatment tumor biopsies from patients with locally advanced rectal cancer receiving intensive neoadjuvant treatment and to correlate the findings with clinical outcome.

Methods

VEGFR-2, EGFR and COX-2 were measured using the immunoreactive score (IRS). SUVmax (median 8.4) was quantified in tumors with molecular overexpression (IRS ≥3 + SUVmax ≥ 8.4 indicating active tumors; SUVmax <8.4 indicating inactive tumors). The Cox proportional hazards model was used to explore associations between tumor markers, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

The study group comprised 38 patients with a median follow-up of 69.3 months (range 4.5 – 92 months). Multivariate analysis showed that active tumors (overexpressing VEGFR-2, high SUVmax) were associated with worse DFS (HR 4.73, 95 % CI 1.18 – 22.17; p = 0.04) and OS (HR 4.28, 95 % CI 1.04 – 20.12; p = 0.05).

Conclusion

Active tumors overexpressing VEGFR-2 are associated with a worse overall outcome in patients with rectal cancer treated with induction chemotherapy followed by pelvic chemoradiation and surgery. The optimal diagnostic cut-off level for this novel biomarker association should be investigated. Evaluation in a clinical trial is required to determine whether selected patients could benefit from a VEGFR-targeting drug.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Heald RJ, Ryall RD. Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet. 1986;1:1479–82.PubMedCrossRef

Smith N, Brown G. Preoperative staging of rectal cancer. Acta Oncol. 2008;47:20–31.PubMedCrossRef

Nagtegaal ID, van Krieken JH. The role of pathologists in the quality control of diagnosis and treatment of rectal cancer – an overview. Eur J Cancer. 2002;38:964–72.PubMedCrossRef

Bosset JF, Collette L, Calais G, Mineur L, Maingon P, Radosevic-Jelic L, et al. Chemotherapy with preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1114–23.PubMedCrossRef

van Gijn W, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, Kranenbarg EM, Putter H, Wiggers T, et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer: 12-Year follow-up of the multicentre, randomised controlled TME trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:575–82.PubMedCrossRef

Bujko K, Nowacki MP, Nasierowska-Guttmejer A, Michalski W, Bebenek M, Pudełko M, et al. Sphincter preservation following preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer: report of a randomised trial comparing short-term radiotherapy vs. conventionally fractionated radiochemotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2004;72:15–24.PubMedCrossRef

Blomqvist L, Glimelius B. The “good”, the “bad”, and the “ugly” rectal cancers. Acta Oncol. 2008;47:5–8.PubMedCrossRef

Roth AD, Delorenzi M, Tejpar S, Yan P, Klingbiel D, Fiocca R, et al. Integrated analysis of molecular and clinical prognostic factors in stage II/III colon cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:1635–46.

Kuremsky JG, Tepper JE, McLeod HL. Biomarkers for response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:673–88.PubMedCrossRef

10.

McShane L, Altman DG, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE, Gion M, Clark GM, et al. REporting recommendations for tumor MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK). Eur J Cancer. 2005;41:1690–6.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Altman DG, McShane LM, Sauerbrei W, Taube SE. Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies (REMARK): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2012;9:e1001216.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Ali HR, Dawson SJ, Blows FM. A Ki67/BCL2 index based on immunohistochemistry is highly prognostic in ER-positive breast cancer. J Pathol. 2012;226:97–107.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Calvo FA, Sole CV, de la Mata D, Cabezón L, Gómez-Espí M, Alvarez E, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT-based treatment response evaluation in locally advanced rectal cancer: a prospective validation of long-term outcomes. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:657–67.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Calvo FA, Cabezón L, González C, Soria A, de la Mata D, Gómez-Espí M, et al. 18F-FDG PET bio-metabolic monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy effects in rectal cancer: focus on nodal disease characteristics. Radiother Oncol. 2010;97:212–6.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Calvo FA, Serrano FJ, Diaz-González JA, Gomez-Espi M, Lozano E, Garcia R, et al. Improved incidence of pT0 downstaged surgical specimens in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) treated with induction oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil and preoperative chemoradiation. Ann Oncol. 2006;17:1103–10.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Quirke P, Durdey P, Dixon MF, Williams NS. Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathological study of lateral tumor spread and surgical excision. Lancet. 1986;2:996–9.PubMedCrossRef

17.

American Joint Committee on Cancer. General information on cancer staging and end-results reporting. In: Cancer Staging Handbook. Seventh edition, Heidelberg: Springer; 2007. p.1–39.

18.

Rödel C, Martus P, Papadoupolos T, Füzesi L, Klimpfinger M, Fietkau R, et al. Prognostic significance of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8688–96.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Beaulieu S, Kinahan P, Tseng J, Dunnwald LK, Schubert EK, Pham P, et al. SUV varies with time after injection in (18)F-FDG PET of breast cancer: characterization and method to adjust for time differences. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1044–50.PubMed

20.

Boellaard R, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA. Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1519–27.PubMed

21.

Remmele W, Stegner HE. Recommendation for uniform definition of an immunoreactive score (IRS) for immunohistochemical estrogen receptor detection (ER-ICA) in breast cancer tissue. Pathologe. 1987;8:138–40.PubMed

22.

Shields AF. Positron emission tomography measurement of tumor metabolism and growth: its expanding role in oncology. Mol Imaging Biol. 2006;8:141–50.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Carmeliet P, Jain RK. Angiogenesis in cancer and other diseases. Nature. 2000;407:249–57.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Hanahan D, Folkman J. Patterns and emerging mechanisms of the angiogenic switch during tumorigenesis. Cell. 1996;86:353–64.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Bouck N, Stellmach V, Hsu S. How tumors become angiogenic. Adv Cancer Res. 1996;69:135–74.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Folkman J. Tumor angiogenesis: therapeutic implications. N Engl J Med. 1971;285:1182–6.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Ferrara N, Gerber HP, LeCouter J. The biology of VEGF and its receptors. Nat Med. 2003;9:669–76.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Dvorak HF. Vascular permeability factor/vascular endothelial growth factor: a critical cytokine in tumor angiogenesis and a potential target for diagnosis and therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(21):4368–80.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Veeravagu A, Hsu AR, Cai W, Hou LC, Tse VC, Chen X. Vascular endothelial growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitors as anti-angiogenic agents in cancer therapy. Recent Patents Anticancer Drug Discov. 2007;2:59–71.CrossRef

30.

Longo R, Gasparini G. Challenges for patient selection with VEGF inhibitors. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2007;60:151–70.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Mandrekar SJ, Sargent DJ. Clinical trial designs for predictive biomarker validation: theoretical considerations and practical challenges. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4027–34.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Motzer RJ, Hutson TE, Tomczak P, Michaelson MD, Bukowski RM, Oudard S, et al. Overall survival and updated results for sunitinib compared with interferon alfa in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3584–90.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Hurwitz HI, Fehrenbacher L, Hainsworth JD, Heim W, Berlin J, Holmgren E, et al. Bevacizumab in combination with fluorouracil and leucovorin: an active regimen for first-line metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3502–8.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Chen Z, Duldulao MP, Li W, Lee W, Kim J, Garcia-Aguilar J. Molecular diagnosis of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:1008–17.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Glynne-Jones R, Anyamene N. Just how useful an endpoint is complete pathological response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;66:319–20.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Sanghera P, Wong DW, McConkey CC, Geh JI, Hartley A. Chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: an updated analysis of factors affecting pathological response. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2008;20:176–86.CrossRef

37.

Glynne-Jones R, Hughes R. Critical appraisal of the ‘wait and see’ approach in rectal cancer for clinical complete responders after chemoradiation. Br J Surg. 2012;99:897–909.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Valentini V, van Stiphout R, Lammering G, Gambacorta MA, Barba MC, Bebenek M, et al. Nomograms for predicting local recurrence, distant metastases, and overall survival for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer on the basis of European randomized clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:3163–72.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Clinical significance of VEGFR-2 and 18F-FDG PET/CT SUVmax pretreatment score in predicting the long-term outcome of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy
verfasst von: Claudio V. Sole
Felipe A. Calvo
Emilio Alvarez
Isabel Peligros
Pilar Garcia-Alfonso
Carlos Ferrer
Enrique Ochoa
Rafael Herranz
Jose L. Carreras
Publikationsdatum: 01.10.2013
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Ausgabe 11/2013
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Elektronische ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-013-2479-7

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

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

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2013

Robustness of intratumour 18F-FDG PET uptake heterogeneity quantification for therapy response prediction in oesophageal carcinoma

Rapid optical imaging of human breast tumour xenografts using anti-HER2 VHHs site-directly conjugated to IRDye 800CW for image-guided surgery

Diagnostic usefulness of 18F-FAMT PET and L-type amino acid transporter 1 (LAT1) expression in oral squamous cell carcinoma

Toxicity of upfront 131I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (131I-MIBG) therapy in newly diagnosed neuroblastoma patients: a retrospective analysis

Somatostatin receptor PET/CT in neuroendocrine tumours: update on systematic review and meta-analysis

Real-time FDG PET/CT-guided bone biopsy in a patient with two primary malignancies