Literature DB >> 22071570

Clinical significance of metabolic tumor volume by PET/CT in stages II and III of diffuse large B cell lymphoma without extranodal site involvement.

Moo-Kon Song1, Joo-Seop Chung2, Ho-Jin Shin1, Sang-Min Lee3, Su-Ee Lee4, Ho-Sup Lee5, Gyeong-Won Lee6, Seong-Jang Kim7, Seok-Mo Lee8, Dong-Seop Chung9.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate whether metabolic tumor volume (MTV) by positron emission tomography (PET) can be a potential prognostic tool when compared with Ann Arbor stage, in stages II and III nodal diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We evaluated 169 patients with nodal stages II and III DLBCL who underwent measurements with PET prior to rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Cutoff point of MTV was measured using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. During a median period of 36 months, stage II was 59.2% and III was 40.8%. Using the ROC curve, the MTV of 220 cm(3) was the cutoff value. The low MTV group (<220 cm(3)) had longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), compared with the high MTV group (≥220 cm(3)) (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). Stage II patients had longer survival than those in stage III (PFS, p = 0.011; OS, p = 0.001). The high MTV group had lower PFS and OS patterns, regardless of stage, compared with the low MTV group (p < 0.001, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed an association of the high MTV group with lower PFS and OS (PFS, hazard ratio (HR) = 5.300, p < 0.001; OS, HR = 7.009, p < 0.001), but not stage III (PFS, p = 0.187; OS, p = 0.054). Assessment of MTV by PET had more potential predictive power than Ann Arbor stage in the patients that received R-CHOP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22071570      PMCID: PMC3319905          DOI: 10.1007/s00277-011-1357-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Hematol        ISSN: 0939-5555            Impact factor:   3.673


Introduction

Introduction of rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) has resulted in improved survival outcomes in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) [1-8]. DLBCL is a heterogenous group of B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), rather than a single clinicopathologic entity [9]. Multiple histologic subtypes were recognized and several molecular and genetic abnormalities were variably present. In recent years, most studies have focused on identifying molecular markers in order to define new prognostic factors. However, no relevant prognostic molecular markers have been validated, and an agreement on prognostic models has not yet been reached [10]. Aggressive NHL, including DLBCL, has been staged according to the Ann Arbor staging system, which was originally designed for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). The International Prognostic Index (IPI) is the primary clinical tool used to predict the outcome for patients with aggressive NHL based on the number of negative prognostic factors at the time of diagnosis, including Ann Arbor stage III/IV and other factors (age ≥ 60 years, elevated lactate dehydrogenase level, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, more than one extranodal site) [11]. However, due to the higher heterogeneity and hematogenous spread pattern of dissemination in NHL relative to contiguous lymphatic spread with HL, Ann Arbor staging system has limited value in the context of assessing accurate tumor burden in NHL. For instance, despite the presence of a high tumor burden in stage II disease, the IPI score can be “zero point,” whereas the score can be “one point” in stage III disease even if the tumor burden is low. New imaging techniques such as 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) have been used as prognostic tools in NHL [12, 13]. As indicated by several positive sets of data, imaging techniques have become an important tool in clinical decisions on therapeutic strategies for treating aggressive NHL, including DLBCL [14-16]. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether metabolic tumor volume (MTV) by PET can be used as a potential prognostic tool, compared with the Ann Arbor stage, in patients with stages II and III nodal DLBCL.

Materials and methods

One hundred sixty-nine patients with de novo nodal DLBCL between July 2004 and November 2008 in five medical centers (Pusan National University Hospital, Dong-A University Medical Center, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Busan Paik Hospital, and Gyeongsang National University Hospital) who underwent PET–CT at diagnosis were enrolled in the present study. All patients received six to eight cycles of R-CHOP therapy according to Coiffier et al [1]. The median follow-up duration was 36 months, and the male-to-female ratio was 1.56:1 (Table 1).
Table 1

The baseline characteristics and comparison between stages II and III nodal DLBCL patients

Total (n = 169) (%)Stage II (n = 100) (%)Stage III (n = 69) (%) p value
Age, median, years (range)61.0 (21–79)62 (22–79)59 (21–76)0.327
Sex, male/female103/6663/3740/290.511
Disease status
 Age ≥ 60 years98 (60.0)63 (63.0)35 (50.7)0.113
 Elevated LDH77 (45.6)43 (43.0)34 (49.3)0.422
 ECOG at least 242 (24.9)21 (21.0)21 (30.4)0.164
 B symptoms71 (42.0)37 (37.0)34 (49.3)0.113
 Bulky LN (≥5 cm)7 (4.1)3 (3.0)4 (5.8)0.911
MTV, median, cm3 (range)198.1 (4.5–1,990.7)122.1 (4.5–1,251.1)434.3 (10.1–1,990.7)<0.001
IPI score, n (%)0.070
 0–2125 (73.9)78 (78.0)47 (68.1)
 3–444 (26.1)22 (22.0)22 (31.8)
Response by revised IWC
 CR142 (84.0)87 (87.0)61 (88.4)0.786
 PR21 (12.4)13 (13.0)5 (7.2)0.236
 SD6 (3.6)0 (0.0)3 (4.3)0.036
Survival (%)
 3-year PFS73.480.063.80.011
 3-year OS76.385.064.20.001

LDH lactate dehydrogenase, ECOG Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, MTV metabolic tumor volume, IPI international prognostic index, PFS progression-free survival, OS overall survival

The baseline characteristics and comparison between stages II and III nodal DLBCL patients LDH lactate dehydrogenase, ECOG Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, MTV metabolic tumor volume, IPI international prognostic index, PFS progression-free survival, OS overall survival

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Patients were included if they had primary nodal localization as a de novo DLBCL histotype, and the stage was II or III according to Ann Arbor staging and had been available for clinical follow-up. Patients were excluded if they presented any extranodal involved site, DLBCL secondary to low-grade NHL, or other treatment, including radiotherapy after R-CHOP therapy or autologous stem cell transplantation and if there was a discrepancy in the LNs between PET and conventional computed tomography (CT). In addition, patients were excluded if they had uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, evidence of infection at the time of diagnosis, especially active tuberculosis, or antibodies against human immunodeficiency virus.

Measurement of MTV by PET/CT

Dual-modality PET/CT tomography was performed on a biograph (Siemens Medical Solution, Hoffman Estates, IL, USA), based on a dual-slice helical CT and a full-ring PET tomography. FDG-PET images were evaluated for regions of focally increased tracer uptake. In the target lesions of FDG tracer uptake, SUV of ≥2.5 as contouring border was considered to represent lymphoma, as suggested by Freudenberg et al. [17]. The CT images were used for PET attenuation correction. Imaging reconstruction of corrected emission data was performed after Fourier transform with AWOSEM software (two iterations, eight subsets, 5 mm Gaussian filter). The CT criterion for pathologic LN was that the LN exceeded 1.0 cm in all regions, except the groin. PET image also evaluated the area of focal tracer uptake; thus, the SUV of ≥2.5 was considered as pathologic LN, and the MTV was measured after CT attenuation correction. CT images were acquired with 130 mAs, 130 kV, and slice width (or 5 min and table feed) of 8 mm per rotation. Intravenous or oral contrast agents were used in all patients, and a standardized breathing protocol was applied. PET images were interpreted by nuclear physicians at each institution. Data were then reviewed by two nuclear medicine experts at Pusan National University Hospital.

Pretreatment and response evaluation

Pretreatment staging and response evaluation after six or eight cycles of R-CHOP therapy were based on clinical examination, CT scan of the neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis, bone marrow biopsy, and PET/CT. Response was assessed according to revised International Workshop Criteria [14]. Criteria were as follows: complete response (CR) is defined as (a) no signs or symptoms of disease, (b) negative PET and regression to normal size on CT, and (c) normal bone marrow. Partial response (PR) is defined as 50% decrease in tumor size but with a positive PET at the prior disease site. Stable disease (SD) is defined as (a) positive PET at the prior sites of disease and no new sites on CT or PET and (b) PET negative and no change in size of previous lesions on CT. Progressive disease is defined as (a) appearance of a new lesion >1.5 cm in any axis, ≥50% increase in the sum of the product of the diameters of more than one node, or ≥50% increase in the longest diameter of a previously identified node>1 cm in short axis and (b) lesions PET positive if FDG-avid lymphoma or PET positive prior to therapy.

Statistical analyses

The Mann–Whitney U test was used for assessment of differences in the frequency-independent prognostic factors of stages II and III groups. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from the date of diagnosis to documented disease progression; observations were censored on the date the patient was last known to be alive or, for patients dying as a result of causes unrelated to lymphoma or treatment, the date of death. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of diagnosis until death as a result of any cause or the date last known to be alive. PFS and OS were estimated by the Kaplan–Meier method, and the difference was compared using a log-rank test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed for estimation of the accuracy in prediction of ideal cutoff value of MTV. Estimation of sensitivity and specificity was based on the cutoff value of MTV. SPSS software for Macintosh (SPSS 15.0; Chicago, IL, USA) was used for statistical data processing. A probability value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Patient characteristics

One hundred sixty-nine patients with stage II/III nodal DLBCL were treated with R-CHOP from 2004 to 2008, and the baseline characteristics were summarized in Table 1. Differences of several independent prognostic factors between stages II and III groups were not observed. However, MTVs in the stage III group were larger when compared with the stage II group (p < 0.001). CR and PR of the treatment response were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.786, p = 0.236, respectively), whereas SD was higher in the stage III group when compared with the stage II group (p = 0.036, Table 1).

Measurement of cutoff value of MTV in patients at diagnosis

ROC curve analysis was employed to calculate the accuracy of the ideal cutoff value, which was used to distinguish the low MTV group from the high MTV group. The estimated area under the ROC curve was 0.857 (p < 0.001; 95% conference interval, 0.782–0.932), which suggests that the value was important to prediction of survival. Various cutoff values of MTV were used to obtain a reasonable balance of sensitivity and specificity; 220 cm3 of various values acquired a sensitivity of 91.7% and specificity of 65.3% (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1

Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in survival prediction according to MTV in 160 stages II and III nodal DLBCL patients (continuous variable). Area under the curve was 0.857 (p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.782–0.932), and 220 cm3 was determined as the cutoff value of MTV for comparison. Sensitivity and specificity of the dichotomized MTV (≥220 versus <220) were 91.7% and 65.3%, respectively

Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis in survival prediction according to MTV in 160 stages II and III nodal DLBCL patients (continuous variable). Area under the curve was 0.857 (p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.782–0.932), and 220 cm3 was determined as the cutoff value of MTV for comparison. Sensitivity and specificity of the dichotomized MTV (≥220 versus <220) were 91.7% and 65.3%, respectively

Clinical outcome according to stage or MTV

Three-year PFS and OS were significantly higher in the stage II group than in the stage III group (PFS, 80.0% in stage II versus 63.8% in stage III, p = 0.011; OS, 85.0% in the stage II group versus 64.2% in stage III, p = 0.001, Table 1). Clinical outcome according to the low MTV group versus the high MTV group was also analyzed, and the results were shown in Fig. 2a, b. PFS and OS were significantly higher in the low MTV group than in the high MTV group (PFS 89.8% versus 55.6%, p < 0.001; OS 93.2% versus 58.0%, p < 0.001).
Fig. 2

Comparisons of survival according to the cutoff value of MTV and stage combined with the cutoff value of MTV. a PFS and b OS according to the cutoff value of MTV were higher in the low MTV group compared with the high MTV group (PFS <0.001; OS, p < 0.001, respectively). c PFS and d OS of stages II and III with the low MTV groups were higher compared with other groups, whereas survival between the two low MTV groups (PFS 90.5% in stage II versus 88.0% in stage III, p = 0.703; OS 95.2% in stage II versus 88.0% in stage III, p = 0.268) or high MTV groups (PFS 60.5% in stage II versus 51.2% in stage III, p = 0.347; OS 65.8% in stage II versus 51.2% in stage III, p = 0.175) were not different

Comparisons of survival according to the cutoff value of MTV and stage combined with the cutoff value of MTV. a PFS and b OS according to the cutoff value of MTV were higher in the low MTV group compared with the high MTV group (PFS <0.001; OS, p < 0.001, respectively). c PFS and d OS of stages II and III with the low MTV groups were higher compared with other groups, whereas survival between the two low MTV groups (PFS 90.5% in stage II versus 88.0% in stage III, p = 0.703; OS 95.2% in stage II versus 88.0% in stage III, p = 0.268) or high MTV groups (PFS 60.5% in stage II versus 51.2% in stage III, p = 0.347; OS 65.8% in stage II versus 51.2% in stage III, p = 0.175) were not different

Clinical outcome according to stage combined with MTV

Further analysis was performed to determine whether tumor burden was of clinical importance between stages II and III nodal DLBCL patients. Outcomes were compared among the four subgroups based on tumor burden and stage II or III (stage II group with low MTV, stage II group with high MTV, stage III group with low MTV, and stage III group with high MTV). The high MTV group, regardless of stage, had lower PFS and OS patterns, compared with the low MTV group (PFS and OS in stage II with low MTV, 90.5% and 95.2%; in stage III with low MTV, 88.0% and 88.0% versus in stage II with high MTV, 60.5% and 65.8%; in stage III with high MTV, 51.2% and 51.2%; p < 0.001, p < 0.001), whereas the prognostic impact of stage in the same MTV group was absent (in the low MTV group, difference of PFS and OS according to stage, p = 0.703, p = 0.268; in the high MTV, p = 0.347, p = 0.175, Fig. 2c, d).

Univariate and multivariate analysis

In the univariate analysis, stage III was still a poor prognostic factor for PFS and OS (PFS, hazard ratio (HR) = 2.094, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.162–3.773, p = 0.014; OS, HR = 2.758, 95% CI = 1.454–5.234, p = 0.002). In addition, high MTV was also shown to be a predictive parameter for poor survival (PFS, HR = 5.799, 95% CI = 2.787–12.055, p < 0.001; OS, HR = 8.097, 95% CI = 3.395–19.309, p < 0.001, Table 2). To further investigate the prognostic value of high MTV, multivariate analysis using a Cox proportional hazard model was performed on the high MTV and stage III groups. This analysis showed that high MTV was an independent factor for the prediction of an unfavorable outcome (PFS, HR = 5.300, 95% CI = 2.517–11.162, p < 0.001; OS, HR = 7.009, 95% CI = 2.902–16.927, p < 0.001), whereas stage III had no significant value (PFS, HR = 1.496, 95% CI = 0.822–2.724, p = 0.187; OS, HR = 1.894, 95% CI = 0.988–3.628, p = 0.0.054, Table 3).
Table 2

Univariate analysis for prognostic factors in patients

Prognostic factorsProgression-free survivalOverall survival
HR (95% CI) p valueHR (95% CI) p value
Stage III2.094 (1.162–3.773)0.0142.758 (1.454–5.234)0.002
High MTV5.797 (2.787–12.055)<0.0018.097 (3.395–19.309)<0.001

MTV metabolic tumor volume

Table 3

Multivariate analysis for prognostic factors in patients

Prognostic factorsProgression-free survivalOverall survival
HR (95% CI) p valueHR (95% CI) p value
Stage III1.496 (0.822–2.724)0.1871.894 (0.988–3.628)0.054
High MTV5.300 (2.517–11.162)<0.0017.009 (2.902–16.927)<0.001

MTV metabolic tumor volume

Univariate analysis for prognostic factors in patients MTV metabolic tumor volume Multivariate analysis for prognostic factors in patients MTV metabolic tumor volume

Discussion

Since its publication in 1971, Ann Arbor staging has been used as the staging system for both HL and NHL lymphomas [15]. However, the number of involved nodal sites was not considered in this optional staging system. For these reasons, the Ann Arbor scheme was revised, and modifications in the staging procedures were recommended within the framework of the Ann Arbor Classification by a committee meeting in the Cotswolds under the auspices of the Cancer Research Campaign and Imperial Cancer Research Fund [16]. However, accurate tumor burden was also not considered in the staging system. Interestingly, one previous study demonstrated that tumor burdens could be discriminated (i.e., low tumor burden vs. high burden) based on the number of extensive nodal areas and extranodal sites [18]. The author of this study suggested that tumor burden measured by their method was an excellent prognostic factor in CHOP era. However, this method only involved a simple arithmetic system, and no imaging techniques were utilized. Because accurate tumor surveillance is a fundamental precondition for assessment of prognosis and therapeutic options in patients with NHL, a more accurate staging system model should be developed, especially in the era of rituximab. A recent meta-analysis study, based on data from three large clinical trials, suggested that treatment with rituximab resulted in significant improvement of the treatment outcome within each of the four IPI factors, including Ann Arbor stage [19]. Of particular interest, the study revealed data from the MabThera International Trial, where the advanced stage (III/IV) was no longer an independent factor of OS in multivariate analysis. In this study, data from the MegaCHOEP Trial also demonstrated that the advanced stage showed borderline correlations with PFS and was not associated with OS. In addition, data from the RICOVER-60 trial shown in this study demonstrated that the advanced stage was not an independent factor of PFS and OS. These findings indicate that treatment with rituximab resulted in improved outcome of advanced stage patients and diminished gap of survival between the limited stage and advanced stage according to the Ann Arbor staging system. For these reasons, we do not believe that the advanced stage itself would be a true poor prognostic factor in the era of rituximab. According to the results of meta-analysis in the above clinical trial, the authors demonstrated that four IPI factors were independent factors. However, it did not address several discrepancies, including patient characteristics, using regimens other than CHOP and a different treatment schedule in each clinical trial. Development of imaging techniques such as 18F-FDG-PET has resulted in increased diagnostic accuracy and allowed clinicians to distinguish primary malignant lesions from benign areas. Thus, 18F-FDG-PET has been reported to provide superior information on staging of NHL when compared with conventional CT scans. Interestingly, two recent studies showed that tumor burden measured by PET could be used to measure the actual tumor burn of lymphoma [20, 21]. One of these studies showed that active tumor burden based on PET might be a prognostic indicator of volumetric response [21]. Volume assessment in these studies was based on percent reduction in SUVmax. However, in the present study, we used a volume measurement process that included a cutoff value of absolute SUV volume measurement, as described by Freudenberg et al. [17]. PET using the tracer 18F-FDG incorporates metabolic tumor function with anatomic localization. Tumor volumes by PET in solid tumors have been associated with clinical outcome in several studies [22, 23]. However, to the best of our knowledge, clinical application of tumor burden by PET as a new staging tool has not yet been reported in DLBCL patients treated with R-CHOP therapy. The findings reported in the present study suggest that total tumor burden of lymphoma is a more important prognostic parameter than Ann Arbor stage for assessing DLBCL. In the multivariate analysis, a high MTV had a greater clinical significance than stage III in survival. This result demonstrates that the Ann Arbor staging system has limited use in assessing DLBCL due to the heterogenous spread pattern of NHL in contrast to HL. Therefore, overall assessment of tumor burden of lymphoma may be needed before treatment strategies can be developed. In addition, the clinical outcome was not different for the patients in the same MTV state; however, the stage was different. These results suggest that a simple classification for prognosis according to diaphragm would not be wise, at least for DLBCL, in the era of rituximab. The present study was conducted to analyze the clinical importance of MTV between only nodal stages II and III DLBCL patients. Therefore, a further well-designed study including all nodal stages and extranodal sites is needed. In conclusion, quantitative assessment of metabolic tumor volume using PET may potentially be more useful in the prediction of clinical outcome than the Ann Arbor staging system in stages II and III of exclusively nodal involved DLBCL patients treated with R-CHOP.
  21 in total

1.  Rituximab-CHOP versus CHOP alone or with maintenance rituximab in older patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Authors:  Thomas M Habermann; Edie A Weller; Vicki A Morrison; Randy D Gascoyne; Peter A Cassileth; Jeffrey B Cohn; Shaker R Dakhil; Bruce Woda; Richard I Fisher; Bruce A Peterson; Sandra J Horning
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-06-05       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  CHOP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CHOP alone in elderly patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma.

Authors:  Bertrand Coiffier; Eric Lepage; Josette Briere; Raoul Herbrecht; Hervé Tilly; Reda Bouabdallah; Pierre Morel; Eric Van Den Neste; Gilles Salles; Philippe Gaulard; Felix Reyes; Pierre Lederlin; Christian Gisselbrecht
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-01-24       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin's disease: Cotswolds meeting.

Authors:  T A Lister; D Crowther; S B Sutcliffe; E Glatstein; G P Canellos; R C Young; S A Rosenberg; C A Coltman; M Tubiana
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Tumor burden assessment and its implication for a prognostic model in advanced diffuse large-cell lymphoma.

Authors:  S Jagannath; W S Velasquez; S L Tucker; L M Fuller; P W McLaughlin; J T Manning; L B North; F C Cabanillas
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  CHOP-like chemotherapy plus rituximab versus CHOP-like chemotherapy alone in young patients with good-prognosis diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma: a randomised controlled trial by the MabThera International Trial (MInT) Group.

Authors:  Michael Pfreundschuh; Lorenz Trümper; Anders Osterborg; Ruth Pettengell; Marek Trneny; Kevin Imrie; David Ma; Devinder Gill; Jan Walewski; Pier-Luigi Zinzani; Rolf Stahel; Stein Kvaloy; Ofer Shpilberg; Ulrich Jaeger; Mads Hansen; Tuula Lehtinen; Armando López-Guillermo; Claudia Corrado; Adriana Scheliga; Noel Milpied; Myriam Mendila; Michelle Rashford; Evelyn Kuhnt; Markus Loeffler
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Long-term results of the R-CHOP study in the treatment of elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a study by the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte.

Authors:  P Feugier; A Van Hoof; C Sebban; P Solal-Celigny; R Bouabdallah; C Fermé; B Christian; E Lepage; H Tilly; F Morschhauser; P Gaulard; G Salles; A Bosly; C Gisselbrecht; F Reyes; B Coiffier
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-05-02       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Hydroxyldaunomycin (Adriamycin) combination chemotherapy in malignant lymphoma.

Authors:  E M McKelvey; J A Gottlieb; H E Wilson; A Haut; R W Talley; R Stephens; M Lane; J F Gamble; S E Jones; P N Grozea; J Gutterman; C Coltman; T E Moon
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1976-10       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Metabolic tumor volume predicts for recurrence and death in head-and-neck cancer.

Authors:  Trang H La; Edith J Filion; Brit B Turnbull; Jackie N Chu; Percy Lee; Khoa Nguyen; Peter Maxim; Andy Quon; Edward E Graves; Billy W Loo; Quynh-Thu Le
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2009-03-14       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Early restaging positron emission tomography with ( 18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Authors:  K Spaepen; S Stroobants; P Dupont; P Vandenberghe; J Thomas; T de Groot; J Balzarini; C De Wolf-Peeters; L Mortelmans; G Verhoef
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 32.976

10.  Two-weekly or 3-weekly CHOP chemotherapy with or without etoposide for the treatment of young patients with good-prognosis (normal LDH) aggressive lymphomas: results of the NHL-B1 trial of the DSHNHL.

Authors:  Michael Pfreundschuh; Lorenz Trümper; Marita Kloess; Rudolf Schmits; Alfred C Feller; Christian Rudolph; Marcel Reiser; Dieter K Hossfeld; Bernd Metzner; Dirk Hasenclever; Norbert Schmitz; Bertram Glass; Christian Rübe; Markus Loeffler
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2004-02-24       Impact factor: 22.113

View more
  51 in total

1.  Baseline and ongoing PET-derived factors predict detrimental effect or potential utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT (FDG-PET/CT) performed for surveillance in asymptomatic lymphoma patients in first remission.

Authors:  Silvia Morbelli; Selene Capitanio; Fabrizio De Carli; Francesca Bongioanni; Enrico De Astis; Maurizio Miglino; Maria Teresa Verardi; Ambra Buschiazzo; Francesco Fiz; Cecilia Marini; Elena Pomposelli; Gianmario Sambuceti
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Prospective Study of 3'-Deoxy-3'-18F-Fluorothymidine PET for Early Interim Response Assessment in Advanced-Stage B-Cell Lymphoma.

Authors:  Heiko Schöder; Andrew D Zelenetz; Paul Hamlin; Somali Gavane; Steven Horwitz; Matthew Matasar; Alison Moskowitz; Ariela Noy; Lia Palomba; Carol Portlock; David Straus; Ravinder Grewal; Jocelyn C Migliacci; Steven M Larson; Craig H Moskowitz
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2015-12-30       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  Baseline PET features to predict prognosis in primary mediastinal B cell lymphoma: a comparative analysis of different methods for measuring baseline metabolic tumour volume.

Authors:  Luca Ceriani; Lisa Milan; Peter W M Johnson; Maurizio Martelli; Stefano Presilla; Luca Giovanella; Emanuele Zucca
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Tumor fragmentation estimated by volume surface ratio of tumors measured on 18F-FDG PET/CT is an independent prognostic factor of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Authors:  Pierre Decazes; Stéphanie Becker; Mathieu Nessim Toledano; Pierre Vera; Paul Desbordes; Fabrice Jardin; Hervé Tilly; Isabelle Gardin
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-04-28       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Predictive value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in adults with T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma: post hoc analysis of results from the GRAALL-LYSA LLO3 trial.

Authors:  Stéphanie Becker; Thomas Vermeulin; Anne-Ségolène Cottereau; Nicolas Boissel; Pierre Vera; Stéphane Lepretre
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-07-21       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 6.  FDG PET/CT imaging as a biomarker in lymphoma.

Authors:  Michel Meignan; Emmanuel Itti; Andrea Gallamini; Anas Younes
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-01-09       Impact factor: 9.236

7.  Reply to the letter.

Authors:  Hajira Ilyas; N George Mikhaeel; Joel T Dunn; Fareen Rahman; Henrik Møller; Daniel Smith; Sally F Barrington
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Prognostic value of Waldeyer's ring involvement of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP.

Authors:  Min-Young Oh; Joo-Seop Chung; Moo-Kon Song; Ho-Jin Shin; Ho-Sup Lee; Sang-Min Lee; Gyeong-Won Lee; Su-Ee Lee
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2013-02-12       Impact factor: 2.490

9.  Baseline metabolic tumour volume is an independent prognostic factor in Hodgkin lymphoma.

Authors:  Salim Kanoun; Cédric Rossi; Alina Berriolo-Riedinger; Inna Dygai-Cochet; Alexandre Cochet; Olivier Humbert; Michel Toubeau; Emmanuelle Ferrant; François Brunotte; René-Olivier Casasnovas
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Metabolic tumour volumes measured at staging in lymphoma: methodological evaluation on phantom experiments and patients.

Authors:  Michel Meignan; Myriam Sasanelli; René Olivier Casasnovas; Stefano Luminari; Federica Fioroni; Chiara Coriani; Helene Masset; Emmanuel Itti; Paolo G Gobbi; Francesco Merli; Annibale Versari
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.