V A Passero1, B F Branstetter2, Y Shuai3, D E Heron4, M K Gibson1, S Y Lai5, S W Kim5, J R Grandis5, R L Ferris5, J T Johnson5, A Argiris6. 1. Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine. 2. Department of Radiology; Department of Otolaryngology. 3. The University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute Biostatistics Facility. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh and Head and Neck Cancer Program, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 5. Department of Otolaryngology. 6. Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine; Department of Otolaryngology. Electronic address: argirisae@upmc.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: RECIST have limitations when applied to potentially curable locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). [¹⁸F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET) scan may be useful in assessing treatment response and predicting patient outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied patients with previously untreated stages III-IVb SCCHN treated with primary concurrent chemoradiotherapy on five prospective clinical trials. Response was assessed by clinical exam, computed tomography (CT), and PET portions of combined PET-CT scan ∼8 weeks after completion of chemoradiotherapy. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were analyzed. Complete response (CR) was demonstrated in 42 patients (79%) by clinical exam, 15 (28%) by CT, and 27 (51%) by PET. CR as assessed by PET, but not as assessed by clinical exam or CT using RECIST, correlated significantly with progression-free status (PFS) (P < 0.0001). The 2-year PFS for patients with CR and without CR by PET was 93% and 48%, respectively (P = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: A negative PET scan on combined PET-CT after chemoradiotherapy is a powerful predictor of outcome in patients receiving curative chemoradiotherapy for SCCHN. PET-CT is indicated for response evaluation in this setting to improve the accuracy of post-treatment assessment by CT.
PURPOSE: RECIST have limitations when applied to potentially curable locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). [¹⁸F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET) scan may be useful in assessing treatment response and predicting patient outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied patients with previously untreated stages III-IVb SCCHN treated with primary concurrent chemoradiotherapy on five prospective clinical trials. Response was assessed by clinical exam, computed tomography (CT), and PET portions of combined PET-CT scan ∼8 weeks after completion of chemoradiotherapy. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were analyzed. Complete response (CR) was demonstrated in 42 patients (79%) by clinical exam, 15 (28%) by CT, and 27 (51%) by PET. CR as assessed by PET, but not as assessed by clinical exam or CT using RECIST, correlated significantly with progression-free status (PFS) (P < 0.0001). The 2-year PFS for patients with CR and without CR by PET was 93% and 48%, respectively (P = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: A negative PET scan on combined PET-CT after chemoradiotherapy is a powerful predictor of outcome in patients receiving curative chemoradiotherapy for SCCHN. PET-CT is indicated for response evaluation in this setting to improve the accuracy of post-treatment assessment by CT.
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: Regiane S Andrade; Dwight E Heron; Berna Degirmenci; Pedro A A Filho; Barton F Branstetter; Raja R Seethala; Robert L Ferris; Norbert Avril Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-06-05 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Barton F Branstetter; Todd M Blodgett; Lee A Zimmer; Carl H Snyderman; Jonas T Johnson; Subha Raman; Carolyn C Meltzer Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Benjamin J Moeller; Vishal Rana; Blake A Cannon; Michelle D Williams; Erich M Sturgis; Lawrence E Ginsberg; Homer A Macapinlac; J Jack Lee; K Kian Ang; K S Clifford Chao; Gregory M Chronowski; Steven J Frank; William H Morrison; David I Rosenthal; Randal S Weber; Adam S Garden; Scott M Lippman; David L Schwartz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-03-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Athanassios Argiris; Dwight E Heron; Ryan P Smith; Seungwon Kim; Michael K Gibson; Stephen Y Lai; Barton F Branstetter; Donna M Posluszny; Lin Wang; Raja R Seethala; Sanja Dacic; William Gooding; Jennifer R Grandis; Jonas T Johnson; Robert L Ferris Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-11-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Johanna Sjövall; Ulrika Bitzén; Elisabeth Kjellén; Per Nilsson; Peter Wahlberg; Eva Brun Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-10-02 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Athanassios Argiris; Steve C Lee; Trevor Feinstein; Sufi Thomas; Barton F Branstetter; Raja Seethala; Lin Wang; William Gooding; Jennifer R Grandis; Robert L Ferris Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2011-09-01 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Ayse Tuba Kendi; David Brandon; Jeffrey Switchenko; Jeffery Trad Wadsworth; Mark W El-Deiry; Nabil F Saba; David M Schuster; Rathan M Subramaniam Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-09-01
Authors: Julia Fruehwald-Pallamar; Christian Czerny; Marius E Mayerhoefer; Benjamin S Halpern; Christina Eder-Czembirek; Markus Brunner; Matthias Schuetz; Michael Weber; Laura Fruehwald; Andreas M Herneth Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Marcelo A Queiroz; Martin Hüllner; Felix Kuhn; Gerhardt Huber; Christian Meerwein; Spyros Kollias; Gustav von Schulthess; Patrick Veit-Haibach Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-02-28 Impact factor: 9.236