PURPOSE: To determine whether whole-body metabolic tumor burden, measured as either metabolic tumor volume (MTVWB) or total lesion glycolysis (TLGWB), using FDG-PET/CT is an independent prognostic marker in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: 328 patients with histologically proven NSCLC were identified for this retrospective analysis. This study was approved by our Institutional Review Board. All patients underwent baseline (18)F-FDG-PET/CT scan imaging before therapy. The MTVWB, TLGWB, maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmaxWB) and mean standardized uptake value (SUVmeanWB) of tumors throughout the whole body were measured from FDG-PET images with semi-automated 3D contouring software. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, there was a statistically significant association of overall survival (OS) with the MTVWB (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.62, p < 0.001), TLGWB (HR = 1.47, p < 0.001). The patients with a MTVWB ≤ median of 65.7 ml and TLGWB ≤ median of 205.11 SUVmean * ml had a median OS of 41.1 and 35.4 months compared with 9.5 and 9.7 months for those with a MTVWB > 65.7 ml and TLGWB > 205.11 SUVmean * ml, respectively. From a series of multivariate Cox regression models, the MTVWB and TLGWB were significantly better than SUVmaxWB and SUVmeanWB at prognostication and significantly associated with patients' OS with HRs of 1.50 (p < 0.001) and 1.42 (p < 0.001), respectively, after adjustment for patient's age, gender and treatment intent as well as the tumor SUVmaxWB, histology and stage. CONCLUSIONS: MTVWB and TLGWB as metabolic tumor burden measurements in (18)F-FDG-PET/CT are independent prognostic markers and are significantly better than SUVmaxWB and SUVmeanWB at prognostication.
PURPOSE: To determine whether whole-body metabolic tumor burden, measured as either metabolic tumor volume (MTVWB) or total lesion glycolysis (TLGWB), using FDG-PET/CT is an independent prognostic marker in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: 328 patients with histologically proven NSCLC were identified for this retrospective analysis. This study was approved by our Institutional Review Board. All patients underwent baseline (18)F-FDG-PET/CT scan imaging before therapy. The MTVWB, TLGWB, maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmaxWB) and mean standardized uptake value (SUVmeanWB) of tumors throughout the whole body were measured from FDG-PET images with semi-automated 3D contouring software. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, there was a statistically significant association of overall survival (OS) with the MTVWB (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.62, p < 0.001), TLGWB (HR = 1.47, p < 0.001). The patients with a MTVWB ≤ median of 65.7 ml and TLGWB ≤ median of 205.11 SUVmean * ml had a median OS of 41.1 and 35.4 months compared with 9.5 and 9.7 months for those with a MTVWB > 65.7 ml and TLGWB > 205.11 SUVmean * ml, respectively. From a series of multivariate Cox regression models, the MTVWB and TLGWB were significantly better than SUVmaxWB and SUVmeanWB at prognostication and significantly associated with patients' OS with HRs of 1.50 (p < 0.001) and 1.42 (p < 0.001), respectively, after adjustment for patient's age, gender and treatment intent as well as the tumor SUVmaxWB, histology and stage. CONCLUSIONS: MTVWB and TLGWB as metabolic tumor burden measurements in (18)F-FDG-PET/CT are independent prognostic markers and are significantly better than SUVmaxWB and SUVmeanWB at prognostication.
Authors: Shengri Liao; Bill C Penney; Kristen Wroblewski; Hao Zhang; Cassie A Simon; Rony Kampalath; Ming-Chi Shih; Naoko Shimada; Sheng Chen; Ravi Salgia; Daniel E Appelbaum; Kenji Suzuki; Chin-Tu Chen; Yonglin Pu Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2011-09-23 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Gerben R Borst; José S A Belderbos; Ronald Boellaard; Emile F I Comans; Katrien De Jaeger; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Joos V Lebesque Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Steven M. Larson; Yusuf Erdi; Timothy Akhurst; Madhu Mazumdar; Homer A. Macapinlac; Ronald D. Finn; Cecille Casilla; Melissa Fazzari; Neil Srivastava; Henry W.D. Yeung; John L. Humm; Jose Guillem; Robert Downey; Martin Karpeh; Alfred E. Cohen; Robert Ginsberg Journal: Clin Positron Imaging Date: 1999-05
Authors: Angela van Baardwijk; Christophe Dooms; Robert Jan van Suylen; Erik Verbeken; Monique Hochstenbag; Cary Dehing-Oberije; Dennis Rupa; Silvia Pastorekova; Sigrid Stroobants; Ulrich Buell; Philippe Lambin; Johan Vansteenkiste; Dirk De Ruysscher Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2007-05-23 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Hao Zhang; Kristen Wroblewski; Yulei Jiang; Bill C Penney; Daniel Appelbaum; Cassie A Simon; Ravi Salgia; Yonglin Pu Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Yonglin Pu; James X Zhang; Haiyan Liu; Daniel Appelbaum; Jianfeng Meng; Bill C Penney Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-06-07 Impact factor: 9.236
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: Xuee Zhu; Chuanhong Liao; Bill C Penney; Feng Li; Mark K Ferguson; Cassie A Simon; Tianming Wu; Haiyan Liu; Yonglin Pu Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: Chenpeng Zhang; Chuanhong Liao; Bill C Penney; Daniel E Appelbaum; Cassie A Simon; Yonglin Pu Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Paula Lapa; Bárbara Oliveiros; Margarida Marques; Jorge Isidoro; Filipe Caseiro Alves; J M Nascimento Costa; Gracinda Costa; João Pedroso de Lima Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2017-08-07 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Christophe Van de Wiele; Vibeke Kruse; Peter Smeets; Mike Sathekge; Alex Maes Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-11-14 Impact factor: 9.236