PURPOSE: 3'-Deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine (FLT) positron emission tomography (PET) has limited utility in abdominal imaging due to high physiological hepatic uptake of tracer. We evaluated FLT PET/CT combined with a temporal-intensity information-based voxel-clustering approach termed kinetic spatial filtering (FLT PET/CTKSF) for early prediction of response and survival outcomes in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer patients receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Dynamic FLT PET/CT data were collected before and 3 weeks after the first cycle of chemotherapy. Changes in tumour FLT PET/CT variables were determined. The primary end point was RECIST 1.1 response on contrast-enhanced CT after 3 months of therapy. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included. Visual distinction between tumours and normal pancreas was seen in FLT PETKSF images. All target lesions (>2 cm), including all primary pancreatic tumours, were visualised. Of the 11 liver metastases, 3 (<2 cm) were not visible after kinetic filtering. Of the 20 patients, 7 progressed (35%). Maximum standardised uptake value at 60 min post-injection (SUV60,max) significantly increased in patients with disease progression (p = 0.04). Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that a threshold of SUV60,max increase of ≥ 12% resulted in sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of 71, 100 and 100%, respectively [area under the curve (AUC) 0.90, p = 0.0001], to predict patients with disease progression. Changes in SUV60,max were not predictive of survival. CONCLUSION: FLT PET/CT detected changes in proliferation, with early increase in SUV60,max predicting progressive disease with a high specificity and PPV. Therefore, FLT PET/CT could be used as an early response biomarker for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, to select a poor prognostic group who may benefit from novel therapeutic agents in advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.
PURPOSE:3'-Deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine (FLT) positron emission tomography (PET) has limited utility in abdominal imaging due to high physiological hepatic uptake of tracer. We evaluated FLT PET/CT combined with a temporal-intensity information-based voxel-clustering approach termed kinetic spatial filtering (FLT PET/CTKSF) for early prediction of response and survival outcomes in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancerpatients receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Dynamic FLT PET/CT data were collected before and 3 weeks after the first cycle of chemotherapy. Changes in tumourFLT PET/CT variables were determined. The primary end point was RECIST 1.1 response on contrast-enhanced CT after 3 months of therapy. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included. Visual distinction between tumours and normal pancreas was seen in FLT PETKSF images. All target lesions (>2 cm), including all primary pancreatic tumours, were visualised. Of the 11 liver metastases, 3 (<2 cm) were not visible after kinetic filtering. Of the 20 patients, 7 progressed (35%). Maximum standardised uptake value at 60 min post-injection (SUV60,max) significantly increased in patients with disease progression (p = 0.04). Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis indicated that a threshold of SUV60,max increase of ≥ 12% resulted in sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of 71, 100 and 100%, respectively [area under the curve (AUC) 0.90, p = 0.0001], to predict patients with disease progression. Changes in SUV60,max were not predictive of survival. CONCLUSION:FLT PET/CT detected changes in proliferation, with early increase in SUV60,max predicting progressive disease with a high specificity and PPV. Therefore, FLT PET/CT could be used as an early response biomarker for gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, to select a poor prognostic group who may benefit from novel therapeutic agents in advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.
Authors: Ken Herrmann; Florian Eckel; Stefan Schmidt; Klemens Scheidhauer; Bernd Joachim Krause; Joerg Kleeff; Tibor Schuster; Hans-Juergen Wester; Helmut Friess; Roland M Schmid; Markus Schwaiger; Andreas K Buck Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2008-08-14 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: A Quon; S T Chang; F Chin; A Kamaya; D W Dick; B W Loo; S S Gambhir; A C Koong Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-10-25 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Adrianus J de Langen; Bianca Klabbers; Mark Lubberink; Ronald Boellaard; Marieke D Spreeuwenberg; Ben J Slotman; Remco de Bree; Egbert F Smit; Otto S Hoekstra; Adriaan A Lammertsma Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2008-10-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: John A Cieslak; Zita A Sibenaller; Susan A Walsh; Laura L Boles Ponto; Juan Du; John J Sunderland; Joseph J Cullen Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2015-12-31 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: R Sharma; P Mapelli; G B Hanna; R Goldin; D Power; A Al-Nahhas; S Merchant; R Ramaswami; A Challapalli; T Barwick; E O Aboagye Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2016-11-16 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Manuela Ventura; Nicholas Bernards; Raquel De Souza; Inga B Fricke; Bart S Hendriks; Jonathan B Fitzgerald; Helen Lee; Stephan G Klinz; Jinzi Zheng Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Hinrich Wieder; Ambros J Beer; Jens Siveke; Tibor Schuster; Andreas K Buck; Ken Herrmann; Jens C Stollfuss Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2018-01-12
Authors: Bart Cornelissen; James C Knight; Somnath Mukherjee; Laura Evangelista; Catarina Xavier; Federico Caobelli; Silvana Del Vecchio; Latifa Rbah-Vidal; Jacques Barbet; Marion de Jong; Fijs W B van Leeuwen Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-09-17 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Matthew Scarpelli; Christopher Zahm; Scott Perlman; Douglas G McNeel; Robert Jeraj; Glenn Liu Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2019-01-30 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Rohini Sharma; Marianna Inglese; Suraiya Dubash; Haonan Lu; David J Pinato; Chandan Sanghera; Neva Patel; Anthony Chung; Paul D Tait; Francesco Mauri; William R Crum; Tara D Barwick; Eric O Aboagye Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2020-06-08 Impact factor: 10.057