PURPOSE: To investigate whether MRI (RECIST 1.1, WHO criteria and the volumetric approach) or (18)F-FDG PET/CT (PERCIST 1.0) are able to predict long-term outcome in nonsurgical patients with giant cell tumour of the tendon sheath or of the diffuse type (GCT-TS/DT). METHODS: Fifteen "nonsurgical" patients with a histological diagnosis of GCT-TS/DT were divided into two groups: symptomatic patients receiving targeted therapy and asymptomatic untreated patients. All 15 patients were evaluated by MRI of whom 10 were treated, and a subgroup of 7 patients were evaluated by PET/CT of whom 4 were treated. Early evolution was assessed according to MRI and PET/CT scans at baseline and during follow-up. Cohen's kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the degree of agreement between PERCIST 1.0, RECIST 1.1, WHO criteria, volumetric approaches and the reference standard (long-term outcome, delay 505 ± 457 days). The response rate in symptomatic patients with GCT-TS/DT receiving targeted therapy was also assessed in a larger population that included additional patients obtained from a review of the literature. RESULTS: The kappa coefficients for agreement between RECIST/WHO/volumetric criteria and outcome (15 patients) were respectively: 0.35 (p = 0.06), 0.26 (p = 0.17) and 0.26 (p = 0.17). In the PET/CT subgroup (7 patients), PERCIST was in perfect agreement with the late symptomatic evolution (kappa = 1, p < 0.05). In the treated symptomatic group including the additional patients from the literature the response rates to targeted therapies according to late symptomatic assessment, and PERCIST and RECIST criteria were: 65 % (22/34), 77 % (10/13) and 26 % (10/39). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET/CT with PERCIST is a promising approach to the prediction of the long-term outcome in GCT-TS/DT and may avoid unnecessary treatments, toxicity and costs. On MRI, WHO and volumetric approaches are not more effective than RECIST using the current thresholds.
PURPOSE: To investigate whether MRI (RECIST 1.1, WHO criteria and the volumetric approach) or (18)F-FDG PET/CT (PERCIST 1.0) are able to predict long-term outcome in nonsurgical patients with giant cell tumour of the tendon sheath or of the diffuse type (GCT-TS/DT). METHODS: Fifteen "nonsurgical" patients with a histological diagnosis of GCT-TS/DT were divided into two groups: symptomatic patients receiving targeted therapy and asymptomatic untreated patients. All 15 patients were evaluated by MRI of whom 10 were treated, and a subgroup of 7 patients were evaluated by PET/CT of whom 4 were treated. Early evolution was assessed according to MRI and PET/CT scans at baseline and during follow-up. Cohen's kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the degree of agreement between PERCIST 1.0, RECIST 1.1, WHO criteria, volumetric approaches and the reference standard (long-term outcome, delay 505 ± 457 days). The response rate in symptomatic patients with GCT-TS/DT receiving targeted therapy was also assessed in a larger population that included additional patients obtained from a review of the literature. RESULTS: The kappa coefficients for agreement between RECIST/WHO/volumetric criteria and outcome (15 patients) were respectively: 0.35 (p = 0.06), 0.26 (p = 0.17) and 0.26 (p = 0.17). In the PET/CT subgroup (7 patients), PERCIST was in perfect agreement with the late symptomatic evolution (kappa = 1, p < 0.05). In the treated symptomatic group including the additional patients from the literature the response rates to targeted therapies according to late symptomatic assessment, and PERCIST and RECIST criteria were: 65 % (22/34), 77 % (10/13) and 26 % (10/39). CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDG PET/CT with PERCIST is a promising approach to the prediction of the long-term outcome in GCT-TS/DT and may avoid unnecessary treatments, toxicity and costs. On MRI, WHO and volumetric approaches are not more effective than RECIST using the current thresholds.
Authors: M Schulte; D Brecht-Krauss; B Heymer; A Guhlmann; E Hartwig; M R Sarkar; C G Diederichs; M Schultheiss; J Kotzerke; S N Reske Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Date: 1999-06
Authors: Andrea L Dewar; Antony C Cambareri; Andrew C W Zannettino; Bernadette L Miller; Kathleen V Doherty; Timothy P Hughes; A Bruce Lyons Journal: Blood Date: 2005-01-06 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Michael Wissmeyer; Sandro Kohl; Freimut D Juengling; Edouard Stauffer; Klaus A Siebenrock; Thomas M Krause Journal: Clin Nucl Med Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 7.794
Authors: L P Adler; H F Blair; J T Makley; R P Williams; M J Joyce; G Leisure; N al-Kaisi; F Miraldi Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1991-08 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Silvia Stacchiotti; Flavio Crippa; Antonella Messina; Silvana Pilotti; Alessandro Gronchi; Jean Y Blay; Paolo G Casali Journal: Clin Sarcoma Res Date: 2013-05-13
Authors: Romain-David Seban; Charlotte Robert; Laurent Dercle; Randy Yeh; Ariane Dunant; Sylvain Reuze; Antoine Schernberg; Roger Sun; Fabien Mignot; Marie Terroir; Martin Schlumberger; Christine Haie-Meder; Cyrus Chargari; Eric Deutsch Journal: Oncoimmunology Date: 2019-03-06 Impact factor: 8.110
Authors: Ephraïm Partouche; Randy Yeh; Thomas Eche; Laura Rozenblum; Nicolas Carrere; Rosine Guimbaud; Lawrence O Dierickx; Hervé Rousseau; Laurent Dercle; Fatima-Zohra Mokrane Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 6.244