nach oben

Skeletal Radiology

Erschienen in:

01.05.2014 | Scientific Article

Prognostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: comparisons between metabolic parameters

verfasst von: Sun-pyo Hong, Seung Eun Lee, Yoon-La Choi, Sung Wook Seo, Ki-Sun Sung, Hong Hoe Koo, Joon Young Choi

Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology | Ausgabe 5/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To investigate the relationship between volume-based PET parameters and prognosis in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 55 patients with pathologically proven STS who underwent pretreatment with ¹⁸ F-Fluorodeoxyglucose (¹⁸F-FDG) PET/CT. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUV_max), average SUV (SUV_avg), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) of primary tumors were measured using a threshold SUV as liver activity for determining the boundary of tumors. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses for overall survival were performed according to the metabolic parameters and other clinical variables.

Results

Cancer-related death occurred in 19 of 55 patients (35 %) during the follow-up period (29 ± 23 months). On univariate analysis, AJCC stage (stage IV vs. I-III, hazard ratio (HR) = 2.837, p = 0.028), necrosis (G2 vs. G0-G1, HR = 3.890, p = 0.004), SUV_max (1 unit - increase, HR = 1.146, p = 0.008), SUV_avg (1 unit - increase, HR = 1.469, p = 0.032) and treatment modality (non-surgical therapy vs. surgery, HR = 4.467, p = 0.002) were significant predictors for overall survival. On multivariate analyses, SUV_max (HR = 1.274, p = 0.015), treatment modality (HR = 3.353, p = 0.019) and necrosis (HR = 5.985, p = 0.006) were identified as significant independent prognostic factors associated with decreased overall survival.

Conclusions

The SUV_max of the primary tumor is a significant independent metabolic prognostic factor for overall survival in patients with STS. Volume-based PET parameters may not add prognostic information outside of the SUV_max.

Coindre JM, Terrier P, Bui NB, et al. Prognostic factors in adult patients with locally controlled soft tissue sarcoma. A study of 546 patients from the French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:869–77.PubMed

Ingmar I, Tobias W, Beate K, Torsten K. Oncological outcome and prognostic factors in the therapy of soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2012;4:e34.

Carneiro A, Bendahl PO, Engellau J, et al. A prognostic model for soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities and trunk wall based on size, vascular invasion, necrosis, and growth pattern. Cancer. 2011;117:1279–87.PubMedCrossRef

Sampo M, Tarkkanen M, Tukiainen E, et al. A web-based prognostic tool for extremity and trunk wall soft tissue sarcomas and its external validation. Br J Cancer. 2012;106:1076–82.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Gustafson P, Akerman M, Alvegard TA, et al. Prognostic information in soft tissue sarcoma using tumour size, vascular invasion and microscopic tumour necrosis-the SIN-system. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:1568–76.PubMedCrossRef

Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480–508.PubMedCrossRef

Johnson GR, Zhuang H, Khan J, Chiang SB, Alavi A. Roles of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-deoxyglucose in the detection of local recurrent and distant metastatic sarcoma. Clin Nucl Med. 2003;28:815–20.PubMedCrossRef

Lucas JD, O’Doherty MJ, Wong JC, et al. Evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of soft-tissue sarcomas. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:441–7.PubMedCrossRef

Roberge D, Vakilian S, Alabed YZ, Turcotte RE, Freeman CR, Hickeson M. FDG PET/CT in initial staging of adult soft-tissue sarcoma. Sarcoma. 2012;2012:960194.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

10.

Schwarzbach MH, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Willeke F, et al. Clinical value of [18-F]] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in soft tissue sarcomas. Ann Surg. 2000;231:380–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

11.

Fuglo HM, Jorgensen SM, Loft A, Hovgaard D, Petersen MM. The diagnostic and prognostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in the initial assessment of high-grade bone and soft tissue sarcoma. A retrospective study of 89 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:1416–24.PubMedCrossRef

12.

La TH, Filion EJ, Turnbull BB, et al. Metabolic tumor volume predicts for recurrence and death in head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:1335–41.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

13.

Leibold T, Akhurst TJ, Chessin DB, et al. Evaluation of ¹⁸F-FDG-PET for early detection of suboptimal response of rectal cancer to preoperative chemoradiotherapy: a prospective analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2783–9.PubMedCrossRef

14.

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

15.

Hyun SH, Choi JY, Shim YM, 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

16.

Moon SH, Choi JY, Lee HJ, et al. Prognostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsil: comparisons of volume-based metabolic parameters. Head Neck. 2013;35:15–22.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, 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

18.

Choi ES, Ha SG, Kim HS, Ha JH, Paeng JC, Han I. Total lesion glycolysis by ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT is a reliable predictor of prognosis in soft-tissue sarcoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1836–42.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Edge SB BD, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti III A, ed. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7th edn. New York: Springer, 2010: 291–298.

20.

de Jong PA, van Ufford HM, Baarslag HJ, et al. CT and ¹⁸F-FDG PET for noninvasive detection of splenic involvement in patients with malignant lymphoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:745–53.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Hatt M, Visvikis D, Albarghach NM, Tixier F, Pradier O, Cheze-le RC. Prognostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1191–202.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the imaging subcommittee of international harmonization project in lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:571–8.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Meng X, Sun X, Mu D, et al. Noninvasive evaluation of microscopic tumor extensions using standardized uptake value and metabolic tumor volume in non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:960–6.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Rakheja R, Makis W, Tulbah R, et al. Necrosis on FDG PET/CT correlates with prognosis and mortality in Sarcomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201:170–7.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Warburg O. On the origin of cancer cells. Science. 1956;123:309–14.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Vallabhajosula S. (18)F-labeled positron emission tomographic radiopharmaceuticals in oncology: an overview of radiochemistry and mechanisms of tumor localization. Semin Nucl Med. 2007;37:400–19.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Adler LP, Blair HF, Makley JT, et al. Noninvasive grading of musculoskeletal tumors using PET. J Nucl Med. 1991;32:1508–12.PubMed

28.

Nieweg OE, Pruim J, van Ginkel RJ, et al. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging of soft-tissue sarcoma. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:257–61.PubMed

29.

Eary JF, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, et al. Quantitative [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in pretreatment and grading of sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;4:1215–20.PubMed

30.

Wong CY, Nunez R, Bohdiewicz P, et al. Patterns of abnormal FDG uptake by various histological types of non-small cell lung cancer at initial staging by PET. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:1702–5.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Huang T, Civelek AC, Li J, et al. Tumor microenvironment-dependent ¹⁸F-FDG, ¹⁸F-fluorothymidine, and ¹⁸F-misonidazole uptake: a pilot study in mouse models of human non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1262–8.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:10–29.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Behranwala KA, A’Hern R, Omar AM, Thomas JM. Prognosis of lymph node metastasis in soft tissue sarcoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:714–9.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: comparisons between metabolic parameters
verfasst von: Sun-pyo Hong
Seung Eun Lee
Yoon-La Choi
Sung Wook Seo
Ki-Sun Sung
Hong Hoe Koo
Joon Young Choi
Publikationsdatum: 01.05.2014
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology / Ausgabe 5/2014
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-014-1832-7

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Prognostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: comparisons between metabolic parameters