PURPOSE: (18)F-fluoro-2-dexoy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/computerised tomography (CT) has been used for staging and monitoring responses to treatment in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The sequential interim PET/CT was prospectively investigated to determine whether it provided additional prognostic information and could be a positive predictable value within patients with the same international prognostic index (IPI) after the use of rituximab in DLBCL. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-one patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were enroled; the assessment of the PET/CT was performed at the time of diagnosis and mid-treatment of rituxibmab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone (R-CHOP). RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients (41.6%) presented with advanced stage disease and 27 (16.8%) had bulky lesions. Forty-three patients (26.7%) continued to have positive metabolic uptakes with a significantly high relapse rate (62.8%) compared to the patients with a negative interim PET/CT (12.1%) (P<0.01). After a median follow-up of 30.8months, the positivity of interim PET/CT was found to be a prognostic factor for both overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), with a hazard ratio of 4.07 (2.62-6.32) and 5.46 (3.49-8.52), respectively. In the low-risk IPI group, the 3-year OS and PFS rates were significantly different in the patients with positive (53.3% and 52.5%) and negative (93.8% and 88.3%) interim PET/CT, respectively (P<0.01). These significant prognostic differences of interim PET/CT responses were consistent with the results of the patients with high-risk IPI group (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Interim PET/CT scanning had a significant predictive value for disease progression and survival of DLBCL in post-rituximab treatment; it might be the single most important determinant of clinical outcome in patients with the same IPI risk.
PURPOSE: (18)F-fluoro-2-dexoy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/computerised tomography (CT) has been used for staging and monitoring responses to treatment in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The sequential interim PET/CT was prospectively investigated to determine whether it provided additional prognostic information and could be a positive predictable value within patients with the same international prognostic index (IPI) after the use of rituximab in DLBCL. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-one patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were enroled; the assessment of the PET/CT was performed at the time of diagnosis and mid-treatment of rituxibmab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone (R-CHOP). RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients (41.6%) presented with advanced stage disease and 27 (16.8%) had bulky lesions. Forty-three patients (26.7%) continued to have positive metabolic uptakes with a significantly high relapse rate (62.8%) compared to the patients with a negative interim PET/CT (12.1%) (P<0.01). After a median follow-up of 30.8months, the positivity of interim PET/CT was found to be a prognostic factor for both overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), with a hazard ratio of 4.07 (2.62-6.32) and 5.46 (3.49-8.52), respectively. In the low-risk IPI group, the 3-year OS and PFS rates were significantly different in the patients with positive (53.3% and 52.5%) and negative (93.8% and 88.3%) interim PET/CT, respectively (P<0.01). These significant prognostic differences of interim PET/CT responses were consistent with the results of the patients with high-risk IPI group (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Interim PET/CT scanning had a significant predictive value for disease progression and survival of DLBCL in post-rituximab treatment; it might be the single most important determinant of clinical outcome in patients with the same IPI risk.
Authors: Mark Hertzberg; Maher K Gandhi; Judith Trotman; Belinda Butcher; John Taper; Amanda Johnston; Devinder Gill; Shir-Jing Ho; Gavin Cull; Keith Fay; Geoff Chong; Andrew Grigg; Ian D Lewis; Sam Milliken; William Renwick; Uwe Hahn; Robin Filshie; George Kannourakis; Anne-Marie Watson; Pauline Warburton; Andrew Wirth; John F Seymour; Michael S Hofman; Rodney J Hicks Journal: Haematologica Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Patrick J Stiff; Joseph M Unger; James R Cook; Louis S Constine; Stephen Couban; Douglas A Stewart; Thomas C Shea; Pierluigi Porcu; Jane N Winter; Brad S Kahl; Thomas P Miller; Raymond R Tubbs; Deborah Marcellus; Jonathan W Friedberg; Kevin P Barton; Glenn M Mills; Michael LeBlanc; Lisa M Rimsza; Stephen J Forman; Richard I Fisher Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-10-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Shadi A Esfahani; Pedram Heidari; Elkan F Halpern; Ephraim P Hochberg; Edwin L Palmer; Umar Mahmood Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-04-09
Authors: David M Kurtz; Mohammad S Esfahani; Florian Scherer; Joanne Soo; Michael C Jin; Chih Long Liu; Aaron M Newman; Ulrich Dührsen; Andreas Hüttmann; Olivier Casasnovas; Jason R Westin; Matthais Ritgen; Sebastian Böttcher; Anton W Langerak; Mark Roschewski; Wyndham H Wilson; Gianluca Gaidano; Davide Rossi; Jasmin Bahlo; Michael Hallek; Robert Tibshirani; Maximilian Diehn; Ash A Alizadeh Journal: Cell Date: 2019-07-04 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Sally F Barrington; N George Mikhaeel; Lale Kostakoglu; Michel Meignan; Martin Hutchings; Stefan P Müeller; Lawrence H Schwartz; Emanuele Zucca; Richard I Fisher; Judith Trotman; Otto S Hoekstra; Rodney J Hicks; Michael J O'Doherty; Roland Hustinx; Alberto Biggi; Bruce D Cheson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2014-09-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bouthaina S Dabaja; Ann M Vanderplas; Allison L Crosby-Thompson; Gregory A Abel; Myron S Czuczman; Jonathan W Friedberg; Leo I Gordon; Mark Kaminski; Joyce Niland; Michael Millenson; Auayporn P Nademanee; Andrew Zelenetz; Ann S LaCasce; Maria Alma Rodriguez Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-12-09 Impact factor: 6.860