BACKGROUND: ([18F])fluorodeoxyglycose-Positron Emission Tomography/Computer Tomography (([18F])FDG-PET/CT) is commonly used in staging of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Its predictive value for response to neoadjuvant therapy and survival after multimodality therapy is controversial. METHODS: Sixty-six consecutive patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Staging was done prospectively with ([18F])FDG-PET/CT, before and after completion of neoadjuvant therapy. Pre- and post-therapy maximal standardized uptake values for the primary tumor (SUV1 and SUV2) were determined, and their relative change (SUV∆%) calculated. Percentage change in SUV1 was compared with histopathologic response (HPR, complete or subtotal histologic remission), disease-free- (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Resection with negative margins was achieved in 60 patients. HPR rate was 14 of 66 (21.2%). Median follow-up was 16 months (range 4-72). For all patients, OS probability at three years was 59% and DFS 50%. In receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis, HPR was optimally predicted by a > 67% change in baseline maximal SUV (sensitivity 79% and specificity 75%). In univariate survival analysis (Cox regression proportional hazards), HPR associated with improved DFS (HR 0.208, p = 0.033) but not OS (HR 0.030, p = 0.101), SUV % > 67% associated with improved OS (HR 0.249, p = 0.027) and DFS (HR 0.383, p = 0.040). In a multivariate model (adjusted by age, sex, and ASA score), neither HPR nor SUV∆% > 67% was predictive of improved OS and DFS. However, SUV∆% as a continuous variable was an independent predictor of OS (HR 0.966, p < 0.0001) or DFS (HR 0.973, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our results support previous results showing that ([18F])FDG-PET/CT can distinguish a group of patients with worse prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction. This information could offer a new independent preoperative marker of prognosis.
BACKGROUND: ([18F])fluorodeoxyglycose-Positron Emission Tomography/Computer Tomography (([18F])FDG-PET/CT) is commonly used in staging of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Its predictive value for response to neoadjuvant therapy and survival after multimodality therapy is controversial. METHODS: Sixty-six consecutive patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Staging was done prospectively with ([18F])FDG-PET/CT, before and after completion of neoadjuvant therapy. Pre- and post-therapy maximal standardized uptake values for the primary tumor (SUV1 and SUV2) were determined, and their relative change (SUV∆%) calculated. Percentage change in SUV1 was compared with histopathologic response (HPR, complete or subtotal histologic remission), disease-free- (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Resection with negative margins was achieved in 60 patients. HPR rate was 14 of 66 (21.2%). Median follow-up was 16 months (range 4-72). For all patients, OS probability at three years was 59% and DFS 50%. In receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis, HPR was optimally predicted by a > 67% change in baseline maximal SUV (sensitivity 79% and specificity 75%). In univariate survival analysis (Cox regression proportional hazards), HPR associated with improved DFS (HR 0.208, p = 0.033) but not OS (HR 0.030, p = 0.101), SUV % > 67% associated with improved OS (HR 0.249, p = 0.027) and DFS (HR 0.383, p = 0.040). In a multivariate model (adjusted by age, sex, and ASA score), neither HPR nor SUV∆% > 67% was predictive of improved OS and DFS. However, SUV∆% as a continuous variable was an independent predictor of OS (HR 0.966, p < 0.0001) or DFS (HR 0.973, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Our results support previous results showing that ([18F])FDG-PET/CT can distinguish a group of patients with worse prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction. This information could offer a new independent preoperative marker of prognosis.
Authors: T Alcindor; L E Ferri; V Marcus; A Andalib; M Hickeson; G Artho; M Chasen; M P Thirlwell; S Ades Journal: Med Oncol Date: 2012-12-29 Impact factor: 3.064
Authors: Sara Carvalho; Ralph T H Leijenaar; Emmanuel Rios Velazquez; Cary Oberije; Chintan Parmar; Wouter van Elmpt; Bart Reymen; Esther G C Troost; Michel Oellers; Andre Dekker; Robert Gillies; Hugo J W L Aerts; Philippe Lambin Journal: Acta Oncol Date: 2013-09-09 Impact factor: 4.089
Authors: Juha Kauppi; Jari Räsänen; Eero Sihvo; Riikka Huuhtanen; Kaisa Nelskylä; Jarmo Salo Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-12-06 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Johannes Lenglinger; Stephanie Fischer See; Lukas Beller; Enrico P Cosentini; Reza Asari; Fritz Wrba; Martin Riegler; Sebastian F Schoppmann Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2013-09-06 Impact factor: 1.704