PURPOSE: We evaluated the role of FDG-PET/CT in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma before palliative chemotherapy to predict prognosis and chemotherapeutic response. METHODS: The study included 35 consecutive newly diagnosed patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent FDG-PET/CT before palliative chemotherapy. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the primary tumor was assessed to evaluate survival and chemotherapeutic response. Survival analysis was performed for time to progression and overall survival using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: All primary tumors were visualized using FDG-PET/CT (mean SUVmax = 8.1 ± 4.5, range 2.5-22.1). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FDG-PET/CT in detection of solid organ metastasis were 95.2% (20/21), 100% (14/14), and 97.1% (34/35), respectively. No significant difference of primary tumor SUVmax was found among the chemotherapeutic response groups. Univariate survival analysis demonstrated ECOG performance status (≥2), presence of solid organ metastasis, number of organs involved in distant metastasis (≥2), and SUVmax of the primary tumor (>8) as significant predictors for poor overall survival. Multivariate survival analysis showed SUVmax of the primary tumor (P = 0.048), presence of solid organ metastasis (P = 0.015), and ECOG performance status (P = 0.002) as significant independent prognostic predictors for overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: High FDG uptake of the primary tumor in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma is associated with poor overall survival. Assessment of tumor FDG uptake has limited value for prediction of chemotherapeutic response, but provides useful information regarding prognosis.
PURPOSE: We evaluated the role of FDG-PET/CT in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma before palliative chemotherapy to predict prognosis and chemotherapeutic response. METHODS: The study included 35 consecutive newly diagnosed patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent FDG-PET/CT before palliative chemotherapy. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the primary tumor was assessed to evaluate survival and chemotherapeutic response. Survival analysis was performed for time to progression and overall survival using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine independent prognostic factors. RESULTS: All primary tumors were visualized using FDG-PET/CT (mean SUVmax = 8.1 ± 4.5, range 2.5-22.1). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FDG-PET/CT in detection of solid organ metastasis were 95.2% (20/21), 100% (14/14), and 97.1% (34/35), respectively. No significant difference of primary tumor SUVmax was found among the chemotherapeutic response groups. Univariate survival analysis demonstrated ECOG performance status (≥2), presence of solid organ metastasis, number of organs involved in distant metastasis (≥2), and SUVmax of the primary tumor (>8) as significant predictors for poor overall survival. Multivariate survival analysis showed SUVmax of the primary tumor (P = 0.048), presence of solid organ metastasis (P = 0.015), and ECOG performance status (P = 0.002) as significant independent prognostic predictors for overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: High FDG uptake of the primary tumor in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma is associated with poor overall survival. Assessment of tumor FDG uptake has limited value for prediction of chemotherapeutic response, but provides useful information regarding prognosis.
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: 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
Authors: J Lee; T Lim; J E Uhm; K W Park; S H Park; S C Lee; J O Park; Y S Park; H Y Lim; T S Sohn; J H Noh; J S Heo; C K Park; S Kim; W K Kang Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-02-13 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Chandrakanth Are; John F Hsu; Ronald A Ghossein; Heiko Schoder; Jatin P Shah; Ashok R Shaha Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2007-08-23 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Carolyn E Reed; David H Harpole; Katherine E Posther; Sandra L Woolson; Robert J Downey; Bryan F Meyers; Robert T Heelan; Homer A MacApinlac; Sin-Ho Jung; Gerard A Silvestri; Barry A Siegel; Valerie W Rusch Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Katja Ott; Ken Herrmann; Florian Lordick; Hinrich Wieder; Wolfgang A Weber; Karen Becker; Andreas K Buck; Martin Dobritz; Ulrich Fink; Kurt Ulm; Tibor Schuster; Markus Schwaiger; Jörg-Rüdiger Siewert; Bernd J Krause Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Francesca Di Fabio; Carmine Pinto; Fabiola L Rojas Llimpe; Stefano Fanti; Paolo Castellucci; Ciro Longobardi; Vita Mutri; Chiara Funaioli; Francesca Sperandi; Stefania Giaquinta; Andrea A Martoni Journal: Gastric Cancer Date: 2007-12-25 Impact factor: 7.370
Authors: Jang Eun Lee; Sang Woo Kim; Jin Su Kim; Kyu Yong Choi; Won Kyung Kang; Seong Taek Oh; Ie Ryung Yoo; Sung Hoon Kim Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2012-09-28 Impact factor: 5.742