PURPOSE: To elucidate the prognostic role of post-therapeutic (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), we conducted a retrospective cohort study analysing the clinical factors that affect overall survival after non-operative therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Sixty-seven cases with unresectable HCC who received non-operative therapy (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization: n = 24, transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy: n = 31, radiofrequency ablation: n = 5 or systemic chemotherapy: n = 7) and had received FDG PET for the evaluation of the therapeutic effect within 1 month after the end of the therapy were evaluated. Overall survival rate was evaluated using the univariate and multivariate analyses of relevant clinical and laboratory parameters before and after therapy, including visual PET analysis and quantitative analysis using maximum standardized uptake value (SUV). RESULTS: Visual PET diagnosis of post-therapeutic lesions was a good predictor of overall survival of unresectable HCC patients. The low FDG group showed significantly longer survival (average: 608 days) than that (average: 328 days) of the high FDG group (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed four significant prognostic factors for the survival: post-therapeutic alpha-fetoprotein (alphaFP) level (=400 ng/ml, p = 0.004), post-therapeutic visual PET diagnosis (p = 0.006), post-therapeutic clinical stage (UICC stage IV, p = 0.04) and post-therapeutic Milan criteria (p = 0.03), while pre-therapeutic clinical factors, SUV by post-therapeutic FDG PET (5.0 or more) or others did not show significance. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that post-therapeutic PET performed within 1 month after non-operative therapy can be a good predictor of overall survival in unresectable HCC patients, while pre-therapeutic evaluation including PET, tumour markers and clinical staging may not be useful.
PURPOSE: To elucidate the prognostic role of post-therapeutic (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), we conducted a retrospective cohort study analysing the clinical factors that affect overall survival after non-operative therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Sixty-seven cases with unresectable HCC who received non-operative therapy (transcatheter arterial chemoembolization: n = 24, transcatheter arterial infusion chemotherapy: n = 31, radiofrequency ablation: n = 5 or systemic chemotherapy: n = 7) and had received FDG PET for the evaluation of the therapeutic effect within 1 month after the end of the therapy were evaluated. Overall survival rate was evaluated using the univariate and multivariate analyses of relevant clinical and laboratory parameters before and after therapy, including visual PET analysis and quantitative analysis using maximum standardized uptake value (SUV). RESULTS: Visual PET diagnosis of post-therapeutic lesions was a good predictor of overall survival of unresectable HCC patients. The low FDG group showed significantly longer survival (average: 608 days) than that (average: 328 days) of the high FDG group (p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed four significant prognostic factors for the survival: post-therapeutic alpha-fetoprotein (alphaFP) level (=400 ng/ml, p = 0.004), post-therapeutic visual PET diagnosis (p = 0.006), post-therapeutic clinical stage (UICC stage IV, p = 0.04) and post-therapeutic Milan criteria (p = 0.03), while pre-therapeutic clinical factors, SUV by post-therapeutic FDG PET (5.0 or more) or others did not show significance. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that post-therapeutic PET performed within 1 month after non-operative therapy can be a good predictor of overall survival in unresectable HCC patients, while pre-therapeutic evaluation including PET, tumour markers and clinical staging may not be useful.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: S Shiomi; S Nishiguchi; H Ishizu; Y Iwata; N Sasaki; A Tamori; D Habu; T Takeda; S Kubo; H Ochi Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: H Young; R Baum; U Cremerius; K Herholz; O Hoekstra; A A Lammertsma; J Pruim; P Price Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: M A Khan; C S Combs; E M Brunt; V J Lowe; M K Wolverson; H Solomon; B T Collins; A M Di Bisceglie Journal: J Hepatol Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 25.083
Authors: S Jonas; W O Bechstein; T Steinmüller; M Herrmann; C Radke; T Berg; U Settmacher; P Neuhaus Journal: Hepatology Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: T Torizuka; N Tamaki; T Inokuma; Y Magata; S Sasayama; Y Yonekura; A Tanaka; Y Yamaoka; K Yamamoto; J Konishi Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1995-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Myeong Jun Song; Si Hyun Bae; Sung Won Lee; Do Sun Song; Hee Yeon Kim; Ie Ryung Yoo; Joon-Il Choi; Young June Lee; Ho Jong Chun; Hae Giu Lee; Jong Young Choi; Seung Kew Yoon Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-02-22 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Lisette T Hoekstra; Matthanja Bieze; Olivier R C Busch; Dirk J Gouma; Thomas M van Gulik Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-10-06 Impact factor: 4.584