OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess differences in morphological and glycolytic characteristics of primary tumors and locoregional nodal disease between human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive and HPV-negative oropharyngeal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 123 baseline FDG PET/CT scans from patients (aged 57.0 ± 10.6 years) with newly diagnosed oropharyngeal SCC between January 2003 and June 2012. There were 98 HPV-positive and 25 HPV-negative patients. SUVmax, SUVpeak, and SUVmean based on lean body mass, as well as RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors) dimensions, metabolic tumor volume (gradient and threshold-segmentation methods) and total lesion glycolysis, were determined for primary and locoregional nodal disease. RESULTS: Human papillomavirus-negative primary tumors were significantly larger as measured by RECIST longest diameter (P = 0.002) and slightly more heterogeneous as measured by the heterogeneity index (P = 0.07), higher SUVmax (P < 0.01), SUVpeak (P = 0.01), SUVmean (P = 0.01), metabolic tumor volume (P = 0.002), and total lesion glycolysis (P = 0.001), for both segmentation methods. Index parameters of HPV-positive nodal disease tend to be larger, but some with no statistical significance (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the metabolic parameters of primary tumor or nodal metastases for HPV-positive patients with and without smoking history. CONCLUSIONS: Index morphologic and glycolytic parameters as measured in FDG PET/CT are significantly larger in HPV-negative as compared with HPV-positive primary oropharyngeal carcinoma. In contrast, the same parameters trended to be larger in HPV-positive regional nodal disease.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess differences in morphological and glycolytic characteristics of primary tumors and locoregional nodal disease between human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive and HPV-negative oropharyngeal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 123 baseline FDG PET/CT scans from patients (aged 57.0 ± 10.6 years) with newly diagnosed oropharyngeal SCC between January 2003 and June 2012. There were 98 HPV-positive and 25 HPV-negative patients. SUVmax, SUVpeak, and SUVmean based on lean body mass, as well as RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors) dimensions, metabolic tumor volume (gradient and threshold-segmentation methods) and total lesion glycolysis, were determined for primary and locoregional nodal disease. RESULTS:Human papillomavirus-negative primary tumors were significantly larger as measured by RECIST longest diameter (P = 0.002) and slightly more heterogeneous as measured by the heterogeneity index (P = 0.07), higher SUVmax (P < 0.01), SUVpeak (P = 0.01), SUVmean (P = 0.01), metabolic tumor volume (P = 0.002), and total lesion glycolysis (P = 0.001), for both segmentation methods. Index parameters of HPV-positive nodal disease tend to be larger, but some with no statistical significance (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the metabolic parameters of primary tumor or nodal metastases for HPV-positive patients with and without smoking history. CONCLUSIONS: Index morphologic and glycolytic parameters as measured in FDG PET/CT are significantly larger in HPV-negative as compared with HPV-positive primary oropharyngeal carcinoma. In contrast, the same parameters trended to be larger in HPV-positive regional nodal disease.
Authors: Mitchell Machtay; Mona Natwa; Jocelyn Andrel; Terry Hyslop; P Rani Anne; Jororsali Lavarino; Charles M Intenzo; William Keane Journal: Head Neck Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Anil K Chaturvedi; Eric A Engels; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Brenda Y Hernandez; Weihong Xiao; Esther Kim; Bo Jiang; Marc T Goodman; Maria Sibug-Saber; Wendy Cozen; Lihua Liu; Charles F Lynch; Nicolas Wentzensen; Richard C Jordan; Sean Altekruse; William F Anderson; Philip S Rosenberg; Maura L Gillison Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-10-03 Impact factor: 44.544
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
Authors: Carole Fakhry; William H Westra; Sigui Li; Anthony Cmelak; John A Ridge; Harlan Pinto; Arlene Forastiere; Maura L Gillison Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2008-02-12 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Elaine M Smith; Justine M Ritchie; Kurt F Summersgill; Jens P Klussmann; John H Lee; Donghong Wang; Thomas H Haugen; Lubomir P Turek Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2004-02-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Yukako Ichimiya; Krishna Alluri; Charles Marcus; Simon Best; Christine H Chung; Rathan M Subramaniam Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-01-15
Authors: Abhinav K Jha; Esther Mena; Brian Caffo; Saeed Ashrafinia; Arman Rahmim; Eric Frey; Rathan M Subramaniam Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2017-03-03
Authors: Ayse Tuba Karagulle Kendi; Kelly Magliocca; Amanda Corey; Dana C Nickleach; James Galt; Kristin Higgins; Jonathan J Beitler; Mark W El-Deiry; J Trad Wadsworth; Patricia A Hudgins; Nabil F Saba; David M Schuster Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: Travis C Salzillo; Nicolette Taku; Kareem A Wahid; Brigid A McDonald; Jarey Wang; Lisanne V van Dijk; Jillian M Rigert; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Jihong Wang; Stephen Y Lai; Clifton D Fuller Journal: Semin Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-10 Impact factor: 5.421
Authors: Muhammad M Qureshi; Paul B Romesser; Abdallah Ajani; Lisa A Kachnic; Scharukh Jalisi; Minh Tam Truong Journal: Head Neck Date: 2015-06-16 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: S Connor; C Sit; M Anjari; M Lei; T Guerrero-Urbano; T Szyszko; G Cook; P Bassett; V Goh Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2021-06-22 Impact factor: 4.553