AIM: To investigate the correlation of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (¹⁸F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) with clinical features and the prediction of treatment response. METHODS: A total of 83 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing ¹⁸F-FDG PET before transarterial chemolipiodolization with systemic chemo-infusion between October, 2006 and May, 2009 were retrospectively enrolled. The patients included 68 men and 15 women (mean age, 60 ± 10.7 years). The effect of (18)F-FDG-monitored PET uptake on clinical features and on the evaluated treatment response was ascertained with modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. The PET parameters of maximal standardized uptake value of the tumor (Tsuv(max)), the ratio of the tumor maximal standardized uptake value (SUV) to the liver maximal SUV (Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(max)) and the ratio of tumor maximal SUV to the liver mean SUV (Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean)) were tested as predictive factors. RESULTS: Among the 3 SUV parameters, the Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean) ratio (cutoff value of 1.90) was significantly associated with tumor burden including tumor size, tumor number, α-fetoprotein levels and tumor stage (P < 0.001, P = 0.008, P = 0.011, P < 0.001, respectively). The objective response rates in patients with a high SUV ratio (≥ 1.90) were significantly better than those with a low SUV ratio (< 1.90) (P = 0.020). The overall survival rates of patients exhibiting a low Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean) ratio (< 1.90) and those with a high SUV ratio (≥ 1.90) was 38.2 and 10.3 mo, respectively (P < 0.01). However, the time to progression showed no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: ¹⁸F-FDG PET can be an important predictor of HCC treatment. In particular, the Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean) ratio (cutoff value of 1.90) can provide useful information in treatment prognosis for HCC patients treated with locoregional therapy.
AIM: To investigate the correlation of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (¹⁸F-FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) with clinical features and the prediction of treatment response. METHODS: A total of 83 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients undergoing ¹⁸F-FDG PET before transarterial chemolipiodolization with systemic chemo-infusion between October, 2006 and May, 2009 were retrospectively enrolled. The patients included 68 men and 15 women (mean age, 60 ± 10.7 years). The effect of (18)F-FDG-monitored PET uptake on clinical features and on the evaluated treatment response was ascertained with modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors. The PET parameters of maximal standardized uptake value of the tumor (Tsuv(max)), the ratio of the tumor maximal standardized uptake value (SUV) to the liver maximal SUV (Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(max)) and the ratio of tumor maximal SUV to the liver mean SUV (Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean)) were tested as predictive factors. RESULTS: Among the 3 SUV parameters, the Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean) ratio (cutoff value of 1.90) was significantly associated with tumor burden including tumor size, tumor number, α-fetoprotein levels and tumor stage (P < 0.001, P = 0.008, P = 0.011, P < 0.001, respectively). The objective response rates in patients with a high SUV ratio (≥ 1.90) were significantly better than those with a low SUV ratio (< 1.90) (P = 0.020). The overall survival rates of patients exhibiting a low Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean) ratio (< 1.90) and those with a high SUV ratio (≥ 1.90) was 38.2 and 10.3 mo, respectively (P < 0.01). However, the time to progression showed no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.15). CONCLUSION: ¹⁸F-FDG PET can be an important predictor of HCC treatment. In particular, the Tsuv(max)/Lsuv(mean) ratio (cutoff value of 1.90) can provide useful information in treatment prognosis for HCC patients treated with locoregional therapy.
Authors: J-L Raoul; B Sangro; A Forner; V Mazzaferro; F Piscaglia; L Bolondi; R Lencioni Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2010-08-17 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: Myeong Jun Song; Si Hyun Bae; Sung Won Lee; Do Sun Song; Hee Yeon Kim; Ie Ryung Yoo; Joon-Il Choi; Young June Lee; Ho Jong Chun; Hae Giu Lee; Jong Young Choi; Seung Kew Yoon Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-02-22 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Wong Hoi She; Tan To Cheung; Thomas C C Yau; Albert C Y Chan; Kenneth S H Chok; Ferdinand S K Chu; Rico K Y Liu; Ronnie T P Poon; See Ching Chan; Sheung Tat Fan; Chung Mau Lo Journal: Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 7.293
Authors: Tianying Zheng; Hanyu Jiang; Yi Wei; Zixing Huang; Jie Chen; Ting Duan; Bin Song Journal: Chin J Cancer Res Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 5.087
Authors: Min Jin Kim; Young Seok Kim; Youn Hee Cho; Hee Yoon Jang; Jeong-Yeop Song; Sae Hwan Lee; Soung Won Jeong; Sang Gyune Kim; Jae Young Jang; Hong Su Kim; Boo Sung Kim; Won Hyung Lee; Jung Mi Park; Jae Myung Lee; Min Hee Lee; Deuk Lin Choi Journal: Korean J Intern Med Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 2.884