UNLABELLED: Markers predictive of treatment effect might be useful to improve the treatment of patients with metastatic solid tumors. Particularly, early changes in tumor metabolism measured by PET/CT with (18)F-FDG could predict the efficacy of treatment better than standard dimensional Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) response. METHODS: We performed PET/CT evaluation before and after 1 cycle of treatment in patients with resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer, within a phase 2 trial of preoperative FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. For each lesion, the maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) and the total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were determined. On the basis of previous studies, a ≤ -50% change from baseline was used as a threshold for significant metabolic response for maximum SUV and, exploratively, for TLG. Standard RECIST response was assessed with CT after 3 mo of treatment. Pathologic response was assessed in patients undergoing resection. The association between metabolic and CT/RECIST and pathologic response was tested with the McNemar test; the ability to predict progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was tested with the Log-rank test and a multivariable Cox model. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were analyzed. After treatment, there was a notable decrease of all the parameters measured by PET/CT. Early metabolic PET/CT response (either SUV- or TLG-based) had a stronger, independent and statistically significant predictive value for PFS and OS than both CT/RECIST and pathologic response at multivariate analysis, although with different degrees of statistical significance. The predictive value of CT/RECIST response was not significant at multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: PET/CT response was significantly predictive of long-term outcomes during preoperative treatment of patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer, and its predictive ability was higher than that of CT/RECIST response after 3 mo of treatment. Such findings need to be confirmed by larger prospective trials.
UNLABELLED: Markers predictive of treatment effect might be useful to improve the treatment of patients with metastatic solid tumors. Particularly, early changes in tumor metabolism measured by PET/CT with (18)F-FDG could predict the efficacy of treatment better than standard dimensional Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) response. METHODS: We performed PET/CT evaluation before and after 1 cycle of treatment in patients with resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer, within a phase 2 trial of preoperative FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. For each lesion, the maximum standardized uptake value (SUV) and the total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were determined. On the basis of previous studies, a ≤ -50% change from baseline was used as a threshold for significant metabolic response for maximum SUV and, exploratively, for TLG. Standard RECIST response was assessed with CT after 3 mo of treatment. Pathologic response was assessed in patients undergoing resection. The association between metabolic and CT/RECIST and pathologic response was tested with the McNemar test; the ability to predict progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was tested with the Log-rank test and a multivariable Cox model. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were analyzed. After treatment, there was a notable decrease of all the parameters measured by PET/CT. Early metabolic PET/CT response (either SUV- or TLG-based) had a stronger, independent and statistically significant predictive value for PFS and OS than both CT/RECIST and pathologic response at multivariate analysis, although with different degrees of statistical significance. The predictive value of CT/RECIST response was not significant at multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: PET/CT response was significantly predictive of long-term outcomes during preoperative treatment of patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer, and its predictive ability was higher than that of CT/RECIST response after 3 mo of treatment. Such findings need to be confirmed by larger prospective trials.
Authors: Antonio Avallone; Luigi Aloj; Biagio Pecori; Corradina Caracò; Alfonso De Stefano; Fabiana Tatangelo; Lucrezia Silvestro; Vincenza Granata; Francesco Bianco; Carmela Romano; Francesca Di Gennaro; Alfredo Budillon; Antonella Petrillo; Paolo Muto; Gerardo Botti; Paolo Delrio; Secondo Lastoria Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-03-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Waleed Shady; Vlasios S Sotirchos; Richard K Do; Neeta Pandit-Taskar; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Mithat Gonen; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2016-07-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: B Ma; A D King; L Leung; K Wang; A Poon; W M Ho; F Mo; C M L Chan; A T C Chan; S C C Wong Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 32.976