Hyung-Jun Im1, Yu Kyeong Kim2, Yong-Il Kim1, Jong Jin Lee3, Won Woo Lee4, Sang Eun Kim4. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea ; Department of Molecular Medicine and Biopharmaceutical Sciences, WCU Graduate School of Convergence Science and Technology, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea ; Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul Metropolitan Government - Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Borame-gil 41, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, 156-707 Korea. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea ; Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Gyeonggyi Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the usefulness of metabolic-volumetric indices of (18)F- fluorodeoxy-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcomes in breast cancer. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with locally advanced breast cancer were enrolled in the study. They underwent baseline (18)F-FDG PET/CT scan and received four or six cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, interim (18)F-FDG PET/CT was done after second cycle of chemotherapy. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) of the primary lesions were calculated. Reduction rates of these parameters were obtained between baseline and interim (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Chemotherapy outcomes were assessed using tumor size reduction rate and histological grading system (Miller and Payne system). Reduction rates of SUVmax, MTV, and TLG correlated with chemotherapy outcomes. RESULTS: MTV and TLG reduction rates showed significant correlation with tumor size reduction rate (R = 0.68, P = 0.0004; R = 0.62, P = 0.002, respectively). However, SUVmax reduction rate showed no significant correlation. MTV and TLG reduction rates were significantly higher in responders than nonresponders, as determined by Miller and Payne system (P < 0.0007, P < 0.002). However, SUVmax reduction rate showed no significant difference. On ROC analysis, the area under the MTV and TLG curves was 0.886, and that of SUVmax was 0.743. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value to predict histopathologic response were the same for MTV and TLG, and the values were 100 %, 85.7 %, 83.3 %, and 100 %, respectively (at the reduction rate of 93.2 % for MTV, and 95.8 % for TLG). CONCLUSION: Changes of metabolic-volumetric indices successfully reflected the neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcomes. MTV and TLG could be robust indices in discriminating pathologic responder as SUVmax, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the usefulness of metabolic-volumetric indices of (18)F- fluorodeoxy-D-glucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for the evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcomes in breast cancer. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with locally advanced breast cancer were enrolled in the study. They underwent baseline (18)F-FDG PET/CT scan and received four or six cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, interim (18)F-FDG PET/CT was done after second cycle of chemotherapy. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) of the primary lesions were calculated. Reduction rates of these parameters were obtained between baseline and interim (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Chemotherapy outcomes were assessed using tumor size reduction rate and histological grading system (Miller and Payne system). Reduction rates of SUVmax, MTV, and TLG correlated with chemotherapy outcomes. RESULTS:MTV and TLG reduction rates showed significant correlation with tumor size reduction rate (R = 0.68, P = 0.0004; R = 0.62, P = 0.002, respectively). However, SUVmax reduction rate showed no significant correlation. MTV and TLG reduction rates were significantly higher in responders than nonresponders, as determined by Miller and Payne system (P < 0.0007, P < 0.002). However, SUVmax reduction rate showed no significant difference. On ROC analysis, the area under the MTV and TLG curves was 0.886, and that of SUVmax was 0.743. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value to predict histopathologic response were the same for MTV and TLG, and the values were 100 %, 85.7 %, 83.3 %, and 100 %, respectively (at the reduction rate of 93.2 % for MTV, and 95.8 % for TLG). CONCLUSION: Changes of metabolic-volumetric indices successfully reflected the neoadjuvant chemotherapy outcomes. MTV and TLG could be robust indices in discriminating pathologic responder as SUVmax, after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Entities:
Keywords:
18F-FDG PET/CT; Breast cancer; Metabolic tumor volume; Neoadjuvant chemotherapy; Total lesion glycolysis
Authors: James D Murphy; Trang H La; Karen Chu; Andrew Quon; Nancy J Fischbein; Peter G Maxim; Edward E Graves; Billy W Loo; Quynh-Thu Le Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-06-18 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Marinke Westerterp; Henderik L van Westreenen; Johannes B Reitsma; Otto S Hoekstra; Jaap Stoker; Paul Fockens; Pieter L Jager; Berthe L F Van Eck-Smit; John T M Plukker; J Jan B van Lanschot; Gerrit W Sloof Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Garry M McDermott; Andrew Welch; Roger T Staff; Fiona J Gilbert; Lutz Schweiger; Scott I K Semple; Tim A D Smith; Andrew W Hutcheon; Iain D Miller; Ian C Smith; Steven D Heys Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2006-08-09 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Gi Jeong Cheon; Min Suk Kim; Jun Ah Lee; Soo-Yong Lee; Wan Hyeong Cho; Won Seok Song; Jae-Soo Koh; Ji Young Yoo; Dong Hyun Oh; Duk Seop Shin; Dae-Geun Jeon Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-08-18 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: W Fraser Symmans; Florentia Peintinger; Christos Hatzis; Radhika Rajan; Henry Kuerer; Vicente Valero; Lina Assad; Anna Poniecka; Bryan Hennessy; Marjorie Green; Aman U Buzdar; S Eva Singletary; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Lajos Pusztai Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-09-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Colleen M Costelloe; Homer A Macapinlac; John E Madewell; Nancy E Fitzgerald; Osama R Mawlawi; Eric M Rohren; A Kevin Raymond; Valerae O Lewis; Peter M Anderson; Roland L Bassett; Robyn K Harrell; Edith M Marom Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Duska Vranjesevic; Christiaan Schiepers; Daniel H Silverman; Andrew Quon; James Villalpando; Magnus Dahlbom; Michael E Phelps; Johannes Czernin Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Hyung-Jun Im; Meiyappan Solaiyappan; Inki Lee; Tyler Bradshaw; Najat C Daw; Fariba Navid; Barry L Shulkin; Steve Y Cho Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-12-20
Authors: Brett Marinelli; Carina Espinet-Col; Gary A Ulaner; Heather L McArthur; Mithat Gonen; Maxine Jochelson; Wolfgang A Weber Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-04-24
Authors: Min Young Yoo; Jin Chul Paeng; Gi Jeong Cheon; Dong Soo Lee; June-Key Chung; E Edmund Kim; Keon Wook Kang Journal: Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-08-29
Authors: Won Woo Lee; Young So; Seo Young Kang; Min-Kyung So; Haeryoung Kim; Hyun Woo Chung; Wan Seop Kim; Sang Eun Kim Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 2.967