Literature DB >> 25012830

Clinical utility of integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in the clinical management and radiation treatment planning of locally advanced rectal cancer.

Jonathan T Whaley1, Annemarie T Fernandes1, Robert Sackmann1, John P Plastaras1, Boon-Keng Teo1, Surbhi Grover1, Rodolfo F Perini2, James M Metz1, Daniel A Pryma2, Smith Apisarnthanarax3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in the staging and radiation treatment planning of locally advanced rectal cancer is ill defined. We studied the role of integrated PET/CT in the staging, radiation treatment planning, and use as an imaging biomarker in rectal cancer patients undergoing multimodality treatment. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirty-four consecutive patients with T3-4N0-2M0-1 rectal adenocarcinoma underwent FDG-PET/CT scanning for staging and radiation treatment planning. Planned clinical management was compared before and after the addition of PET/CT information. Three radiation oncologists independently delineated CT-based gross tumor volumes (GTVCT) using clinical information and CT imaging data, as well as gradient autosegmented PET/CT-based GTVs (GTVPETCT). The mean GTV, interobserver concordance index (CCI), and proximal and distal margins were compared. The maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and dual-time point PET parameters were correlated with clinicopathologic endpoints.
RESULTS: Clinical management was altered by PET/CT in 18% (n = 6) of patients with clinical upstaging in 6 patients and radiation treatment planning altered in 5 patients. Of the 30 evaluable preoperative patients, the mean GTVPETCT was significantly smaller than the mean GTVCT volumes: 88.1 versus 102.8 cc (P = .03). PET/CT significantly increased interobserver CCI in contouring GTV compared with CT only-based contouring: 0.56 versus 0.38 (P < .001). The proximal and distal margins were altered by a mean of 0.4 ± 0.24 cm and -0.25 ± 0.18 cm, respectively. MTV was inversely associated with 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS): smaller MTVs (<33 cc) had superior 2-year PFS (86% vs 60%, P = .04) and OS (100% vs 45%, P < .01) compared with larger MTVs (>33 cc). SUVmax and dual-time point PET parameters did not correlate with any endpoints.
CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET/CT imaging impacts overall clinical management and is useful in the radiation treatment planning of rectal cancer patients by decreasing interobserver variability in contouring target boost volumes. Pretreatment MTV may provide useful prognostic information and requires further study.
© 2014.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 25012830     DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2013.09.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol        ISSN: 1879-8500


  4 in total

1.  Value of Primary Rectal Tumor PET/MRI in the Prediction of Synchronic Metastatic Disease.

Authors:  Marcelo A Queiroz; Cinthia D Ortega; Felipe R Ferreira; Fernanda C Capareli; Sergio C Nahas; Giovanni G Cerri; Carlos A Buchpiguel
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2021-11-09       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Improving the accuracy and consistency of clinical target volume delineation for rectal cancer by an education program.

Authors:  Yang-Zi Zhang; Xiang-Gao Zhu; Ma-Xiaowei Song; Kai-Ning Yao; Shuai Li; Jian-Hao Geng; Hong-Zhi Wang; Yong-Heng Li; Yong Cai; Wei-Hu Wang
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2022-05-15

Review 3.  Anorectal Cancer: Critical Anatomic and Staging Distinctions That Affect Use of Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Shanna A Matalon; Harvey J Mamon; Charles S Fuchs; Leona A Doyle; Sree Harsha Tirumani; Nikhil H Ramaiya; Michael H Rosenthal
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2015 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.333

Review 4.  The Use of Quantitative Imaging in Radiation Oncology: A Quantitative Imaging Network (QIN) Perspective.

Authors:  Robert H Press; Hui-Kuo G Shu; Hyunsuk Shim; James M Mountz; Brenda F Kurland; Richard L Wahl; Ella F Jones; Nola M Hylton; Elizabeth R Gerstner; Robert J Nordstrom; Lori Henderson; Karen A Kurdziel; Bhadrasain Vikram; Michael A Jacobs; Matthias Holdhoff; Edward Taylor; David A Jaffray; Lawrence H Schwartz; David A Mankoff; Paul E Kinahan; Hannah M Linden; Philippe Lambin; Thomas J Dilling; Daniel L Rubin; Lubomir Hadjiiski; John M Buatti
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2018-06-30       Impact factor: 7.038

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.