BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the variation in cervical cancer glucose metabolism for different tumor histologies and levels of differentiation, as measured by the uptake of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) by positron emission tomography (PET). METHODS: The study population consisted of 240 patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages Ib1 through IVb cervical cancer, who underwent a pretreatment FDG-PET. Tumor histology included 221 squamous cell (SC), 4 adenosquamous (AS), and 15 adenocarcinoma (AC) tumors. There were 14 well, 145 moderately, and 81 poorly differentiated tumors. The stage distribution was as follows: 70 stage I tumors (9 AC, 2 AS, and 59 SC), 102 stage II tumors (3 AC, 1 AS, and 98 SC), 64 stage III tumors (3 AC, 1 AS, and 60 SC), and 4 stage IV tumors (4 SC). From the FDG-PET, maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was determined. The variation in SUVmax was analyzed for differences based on tumor histology and differentiation. RESULTS: For all patients, the mean SUVmax was 11.62 (range, 2.50-50.39). The mean SUVmax by histology was as follows: SC, 11.91 (range, 2.50-50.39); AS, 8.85 (range, 6.53-11.26); and AC, 8.05 (range, 2.83-13.92). Squamous versus nonsquamous tumors demonstrated a significant difference in SUVmax (P=.0153). SUVmax and tumor volume were not found to be correlated (R2=0.013). The mean SUVmax was 8.58 for well-differentiated, 11.56 for moderately differentiated, and 12.23 for poorly differentiated tumors. The mean SUVmax was significantly different for well-differentiated versus poorly differentiated cervical tumors (P=.0474). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical tumor FDG uptake varied by histology and differentiation. SC tumors demonstrated a significantly higher SUVmax compared with nonsquamous cell tumors, and poorly differentiated tumors also had a higher SUVmax. Copyright (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the variation in cervical cancer glucose metabolism for different tumor histologies and levels of differentiation, as measured by the uptake of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) by positron emission tomography (PET). METHODS: The study population consisted of 240 patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stages Ib1 through IVb cervical cancer, who underwent a pretreatment FDG-PET. Tumor histology included 221 squamous cell (SC), 4 adenosquamous (AS), and 15 adenocarcinoma (AC) tumors. There were 14 well, 145 moderately, and 81 poorly differentiated tumors. The stage distribution was as follows: 70 stage I tumors (9 AC, 2 AS, and 59 SC), 102 stage II tumors (3 AC, 1 AS, and 98 SC), 64 stage III tumors (3 AC, 1 AS, and 60 SC), and 4 stage IV tumors (4 SC). From the FDG-PET, maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was determined. The variation in SUVmax was analyzed for differences based on tumor histology and differentiation. RESULTS: For all patients, the mean SUVmax was 11.62 (range, 2.50-50.39). The mean SUVmax by histology was as follows: SC, 11.91 (range, 2.50-50.39); AS, 8.85 (range, 6.53-11.26); and AC, 8.05 (range, 2.83-13.92). Squamous versus nonsquamous tumors demonstrated a significant difference in SUVmax (P=.0153). SUVmax and tumor volume were not found to be correlated (R2=0.013). The mean SUVmax was 8.58 for well-differentiated, 11.56 for moderately differentiated, and 12.23 for poorly differentiated tumors. The mean SUVmax was significantly different for well-differentiated versus poorly differentiated cervical tumors (P=.0474). CONCLUSIONS: Cervical tumorFDG uptake varied by histology and differentiation. SC tumors demonstrated a significantly higher SUVmax compared with nonsquamous cell tumors, and poorly differentiated tumors also had a higher SUVmax. Copyright (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.
Authors: Alexander J Lin; Jason D Wright; Farrokh Dehdashti; Barry A Siegel; Stephanie Markovina; Julie Schwarz; Premal H Thaker; David G Mutch; Matthew A Powell; Perry W Grigsby Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Michael T Spiotto; Alice Banh; Ioanna Papandreou; Hongbin Cao; Michael G Galvez; Geoffrey C Gurtner; Nicholas C Denko; Quynh Thu Le; Albert C Koong Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2009-12-22 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Mubarik A Arshad; Samuel Gitau; Henry Tam; Won-Ho E Park; Neva H Patel; Andrea Rockall; Eric O Aboagye; Nishat Bharwani; Tara D Barwick Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-12-11 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Constantin Lapa; Ursula Nestle; Nathalie L Albert; Christian Baues; Ambros Beer; Andreas Buck; Volker Budach; Rebecca Bütof; Stephanie E Combs; Thorsten Derlin; Matthias Eiber; Wolfgang P Fendler; Christian Furth; Cihan Gani; Eleni Gkika; Anca-L Grosu; Christoph Henkenberens; Harun Ilhan; Steffen Löck; Simone Marnitz-Schulze; Matthias Miederer; Michael Mix; Nils H Nicolay; Maximilian Niyazi; Christoph Pöttgen; Claus M Rödel; Imke Schatka; Sarah M Schwarzenboeck; Andrei S Todica; Wolfgang Weber; Simone Wegen; Thomas Wiegel; Constantinos Zamboglou; Daniel Zips; Klaus Zöphel; Sebastian Zschaeck; Daniela Thorwarth; Esther G C Troost Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 3.621