Literature DB >> 19742140

Influence of Diabetes on the Interpretation of PET Scans in Patients With Esophageal Cancer.

Michael Haley1, Andre Konski, Tianyu Li, Jonathan D Cheng, Alan Maurer, Oleh Haluszka, Walter Scott, Neal J Meropol, Steven J Cohen, Gary Freedman.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) can have altered sugar transport into cells, potentially affecting the results of 18-FDG PET scans. The specific aim of this study was to determine the effect of DM on pre- and post-treatment standard uptake value (SUV) scores in patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.
METHODS: Patients with locally advanced esophageal carcinoma undergoing preoperative or definitive chemoradiotherapy underwent pre- and posttreatment 18-FDG PET scans. Maximum SUV score was measured from the tumor before chemoradiotherapy and 3 to 4 weeks after chemoradiotherapy (preoperatively). Patients were identified as having DM by medical record review. Random serum glucose measurements were obtained prior to 18-FDG PET scans. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to test for differences in SUV scores between patients with and without DM, and a generalized linear model with backward selection was applied to search for significant predictors of initial and posttreatment SUV scores.
RESULTS: Sixty-three patients underwent 18-FDG PET scans during the course of treatment for esophageal malignancies between 6/02 and 8/05. Fifty-four patients received chemotherapy. The median radiation dose was 46.8 Gy. Eighteen patients had DM, six were insulin-dependent DM (IDDM). There was no difference in initial SUV scores between DM and non-DM patients (P > .05). There was also no difference in initial SUV scores between IDDM and non-IDDM groups. Patients with tumors at the gastroesophageal junction had lower initial SUV scores compared to patients with tumors in the lower or mid-esophagus (P = .05). T stage was associated with initial SUV score (T2 lower than T3, P = .014). Older age (P = .03), diabetes (P = .007), higher T stage (P = .002), and presence of nodes (P = .05) were each positively associated with posttreatment SUV scores. Blood glucose levels prior to 18-FDG PET scan, endoscopic tumor length, and tumor location were not predictive of posttreatment SUV scores. Patients with DM had significantly lower posttreatment SUV scores compared to patients without DM (P = .04). Pathologic complete response or percent SUV decrease did not differ between patients with or without DM.
CONCLUSION: Regardless of glucose levels, DM and IDDM do not influence pretreatment SUV scores in patients with localized esophageal cancer. However, DM may influence posttreatment SUV scores and thus complicate interpretation of treatment response. Further confirmatory study in a larger cohort of DM patients to evaluate the relationship of posttreatment SUV score to pathologic response is warranted.

Entities:  

Year:  2009        PMID: 19742140      PMCID: PMC2739639     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Cancer Res        ISSN: 1934-7820


  16 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review of the staging performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in esophageal cancer.

Authors:  H L van Westreenen; M Westerterp; P M M Bossuyt; J Pruim; G W Sloof; J J B van Lanschot; H Groen; J Th M Plukker
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Serum glucose: effects on tumor and normal tissue accumulation of 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in rodents with mammary carcinoma.

Authors:  R L Wahl; C A Henry; S P Ethier
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Impact of CT and 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography image fusion for conformal radiotherapy in esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Laurence Moureau-Zabotto; Emmanuel Touboul; Delphine Lerouge; Elisabeth Deniaud-Alexandre; Dany Grahek; Jean-Noël Foulquier; Yolande Petegnief; Benoît Grès; Hanna El Balaa; Kaldoun Kerrou; Françoise Montravers; Katia Keraudy; Emmanuel Tiret; Jean-Pierre Gendre; Jean-Didier Grange; Sidney Houry; Jean-Noël Talbot
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2005-10-01       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Is there a role for FGD-PET in radiotherapy planning in esophageal carcinoma?

Authors:  Olga Vrieze; Karin Haustermans; Walter De Wever; Toni Lerut; Eric Van Cutsem; Nadine Ectors; Martin Hiele; Patrick Flamen
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 6.280

5.  Does diabetes mellitus influence the efficacy of FDG-PET in the diagnosis of cervical cancer?

Authors:  Yu-Chen Chang; Tzu-Chen Yen; Koon-Kwan Ng; Lai-Chu See; Chyong-Huey Lai; Ting-Chang Chang; Chien-Sheng Tsai; Ji-Hong Hong; Swei Hsueh; Hung-Hsueh Chou
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2005-02-10       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Diabetes Decreases FDG Accumulation in Primary Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Tatsuo Torizuka; Kenneth R. Zasadny; Richard L. Wahl
Journal:  Clin Positron Imaging       Date:  1999-10

7.  FDG PET: elevated plasma glucose reduces both uptake and detection rate of pancreatic malignancies.

Authors:  C G Diederichs; L Staib; G Glatting; H G Beger; S N Reske
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Influence of the blood glucose concentration on FDG uptake in cancer--a PET study.

Authors:  P Lindholm; H Minn; S Leskinen-Kallio; J Bergman; U Ruotsalainen; H Joensuu
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 10.057

9.  Does diabetes affect [(18)F]FDG standardised uptake values in lung cancer?

Authors:  Miguel Gorenberg; William A Hallett; Michael J O'Doherty
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2002-08-10       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  A fluorinated glucose analog, 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (F-18): nontoxic tracer for rapid tumor detection.

Authors:  P Som; H L Atkins; D Bandoypadhyay; J S Fowler; R R MacGregor; K Matsui; Z H Oster; D F Sacker; C Y Shiue; H Turner; C N Wan; A P Wolf; S V Zabinski
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1980-07       Impact factor: 10.057

View more
  5 in total

1.  The role of qualitative and quantitative analysis of F18-FDG positron emission tomography in predicting pathologic response following chemoradiotherapy in patients with esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Tracy Klayton; Tianyu Li; Jian Q Yu; Lanea Keller; Jonathan Cheng; Steven J Cohen; Neal J Meropol; Walter Scott; Meng Xu-Welliver; Andre Konski
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2012-12

2.  Diagnostic value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT for lymph node metastasis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Yamada; Masao Hosokawa; Kazuo Itoh; Toshinao Takenouchi; Yoshihiro Kinoshita; Tomohiro Kikkawa; Keita Sakashita; Shion Uemura; Yasunori Nishida; Takaya Kusumi; Shigeyuki Sasaki
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.549

3.  Diabetes and PET Scans: Only Part of a Bigger Problem.

Authors:  Amit Khithani
Journal:  Gastrointest Cancer Res       Date:  2009-07

Review 4.  Prognostic significance of SUV on PET/CT in patients with localised oesophagogastric junction cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiation:a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  W Zhu; L Xing; J Yue; X Sun; X Sun; H Zhao; J Yu
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-02-14       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Does diabetes mellitus influence standardized uptake values of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer?

Authors:  Da Yeon Oh; Ji Won Kim; Seong-Joon Koh; Mingoo Kim; Ji Hoon Park; Su Yeon Cho; Byeong Gwan Kim; Kook Lae Lee; Jong Pil Im
Journal:  Intest Res       Date:  2014-04-29
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.