Literature DB >> 15534053

18F-FDG PET in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma undergoing curative surgery: prognostic implications.

Joon Young Choi1, Hong-Ju Jang, Young Mog Shim, Kwhanmien Kim, Kyung Soo Lee, Kyung-Han Lee, Yong Choi, Yearn Seong Choe, Byung-Tae Kim.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We investigated whether the standardized uptake value (SUV) of the primary tumor, the tumor length measured on a PET image, the number of (18)F-FDG PET-positive nodes, and the PET stage were independent prognostic predictors over other clinical variables in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who were undergoing curative surgery.
METHODS: Sixty-nine patients with newly diagnosed esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent preoperative (18)F-FDG PET and curative esophagectomy were included. The events for survival analysis were defined as recurrence or metastasis and cancer-related death. The disease-free and overall survival rates of each variable were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate independent prognostic variables for multivariate survival analysis.
RESULTS: Using univariate survival analysis, the presence of adjuvant therapy, pathologic stage, number of CT-positive nodes (0, 1, > or =2), tumor length on PET (cutoff: 3 cm, 5 cm), number of PET-positive nodes (0, 1, 2, > or =3), and PET stage (N0 M0, N1 M0, M1) were significant prognostic predictors for disease-free survival. However, only the number of PET-positive nodes was an independent significant prognostic predictor for disease-free survival in multivariate analysis (hazard ratio = 1.87, P < 0.001). In univariate survival analysis, the sex, presence of adjuvant therapy, clinical and pathologic stages, number of CT-positive nodes, maximum SUV of the primary tumor (cutoff: 6.3, 13.7), tumor length on PET, number of PET-positive nodes, and PET stage were significant prognostic predictors for overall survival. In contrast, the clinical stage (hazard ratio = 0.53, P < 0.05), pathologic stage (hazard ratio = 3.14, P < 0.005), tumor length by PET (hazard ratio = 2.74, P = 0.01), and number of PET-positive nodes (hazard ratio = 1.71, P < 0.05) were independent significant prognostic predictors for overall survival in multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSION: In addition to the pathologic stage, (18)F-FDG PET provides noninvasively independent prognostic information using the number of positive lymph nodes and the tumor length on the PET image in preoperative esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. A revised TNM classification system for esophageal carcinoma may consider tumor length and the number of positive lymph nodes as important prognostic factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15534053

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  31 in total

1.  Accuracy of PET-CT in predicting survival in patients with esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Claire Brown; Ben Howes; Glyn G Jamieson; Dylan Bartholomeusz; Urs Zingg; Thomas R Sullivan; Sarah K Thompson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Diagnostic value of surveillance 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT for detecting recurrent esophageal carcinoma after curative treatment.

Authors:  Soo Jeong Kim; Seung Hyup Hyun; Seung Hwan Moon; Kyung Soo Lee; Jong-Mu Sun; Dongryul Oh; Yong Chan Ahn; Jae Il Zo; Young Mog Shim; Joon Young Choi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Significant clinical impact and prognostic stratification provided by FDG-PET in the staging of oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Cuong P Duong; Helen Demitriou; Leann Weih; Anne Thompson; David Williams; Robert J S Thomas; Rodney J Hicks
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-02-10       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  PET imaging for prediction of response to therapy and outcome in oesophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Sue Chua; John Dickson; Ashley M Groves
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Real-time FDG PET guidance during biopsies and radiofrequency ablation using multimodality fusion with electromagnetic navigation.

Authors:  Aradhana M Venkatesan; Samuel Kadoury; Nadine Abi-Jaoudeh; Elliot B Levy; Roberto Maass-Moreno; Jochen Krücker; Sandeep Dalal; Sheng Xu; Neil Glossop; Bradford J Wood
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging evaluation of esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hossein Jadvar; Robert W Henderson; Peter S Conti
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.488

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

Authors:  Mathieu Hatt; Dimitris Visvikis; Nidal M Albarghach; Florent Tixier; Olivier Pradier; Catherine Cheze-le Rest
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Prospective comparison of optic versus blind endoscopic ultrasound in staging esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Christopher P Twine; Wyn G Lewis; Xavier Escofet; David Bosanquet; S Ashley Roberts
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 9.  State-of-the-art molecular imaging in esophageal cancer management: implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.

Authors:  Jolinta Lin; Seth Kligerman; Rakhi Goel; Payam Sajedi; Mohan Suntharalingam; Michael D Chuong
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-02

Review 10.  Positron emission tomography measurement of tumor metabolism and growth: its expanding role in oncology.

Authors:  Anthony F Shields
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.488

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.