Carryn M Anderson1, Tangel Chang2, Michael M Graham3, Michael D Marquardt2, Anna Button4, Brian J Smith4, Yusuf Menda3, Wenqing Sun2, Nitin A Pagedar5, John M Buatti2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. Electronic address: carryn-anderson@uiowa.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 4. Department of Biostatistics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 5. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate dynamic [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake methodology as a post-radiation therapy (RT) response assessment tool, potentially enabling accurate tumor and therapy-related inflammation differentiation, improving the posttherapy value of FDG-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We prospectively enrolled head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma patients who completed RT, with scheduled 3-month post-RT FDG-PET/CT. Patients underwent our standard whole-body PET/CT scan at 90 minutes, with the addition of head-and-neck PET/CT scans at 60 and 120 minutes. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUV(max)) of regions of interest were measured at 60, 90, and 120 minutes. The SUV(max) slope between 60 and 120 minutes and change of SUV(max) slope before and after 90 minutes were calculated. Data were analyzed by primary site and nodal site disease status using the Cox regression model and Wilcoxon rank sum test. Outcomes were based on pathologic and clinical follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients were enrolled, with 79 primary and 43 nodal evaluable sites. Twenty-eight sites were interpreted as positive or equivocal (18 primary, 8 nodal, 2 distant) on 3-month 90-minute FDG-PET/CT. Median follow-up was 13.3 months. All measured SUV endpoints predicted recurrence. Change of SUV(max) slope after 90 minutes more accurately identified nonrecurrence in positive or equivocal sites than our current standard of SUV(max) ≥2.5 (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: The positive predictive value of post-RT FDG-PET/CT may significantly improve using novel second derivative analysis of dynamic triphasic FDG-PET/CT SUV(max) slope, accurately distinguishing tumor from inflammation on positive and equivocal scans.
PURPOSE: To evaluate dynamic [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake methodology as a post-radiation therapy (RT) response assessment tool, potentially enabling accurate tumor and therapy-related inflammation differentiation, improving the posttherapy value of FDG-positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT). METHODS AND MATERIALS: We prospectively enrolled head-and-neck squamous cell carcinomapatients who completed RT, with scheduled 3-month post-RT FDG-PET/CT. Patients underwent our standard whole-body PET/CT scan at 90 minutes, with the addition of head-and-neck PET/CT scans at 60 and 120 minutes. Maximum standardized uptake values (SUV(max)) of regions of interest were measured at 60, 90, and 120 minutes. The SUV(max) slope between 60 and 120 minutes and change of SUV(max) slope before and after 90 minutes were calculated. Data were analyzed by primary site and nodal site disease status using the Cox regression model and Wilcoxon rank sum test. Outcomes were based on pathologic and clinical follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients were enrolled, with 79 primary and 43 nodal evaluable sites. Twenty-eight sites were interpreted as positive or equivocal (18 primary, 8 nodal, 2 distant) on 3-month 90-minute FDG-PET/CT. Median follow-up was 13.3 months. All measured SUV endpoints predicted recurrence. Change of SUV(max) slope after 90 minutes more accurately identified nonrecurrence in positive or equivocal sites than our current standard of SUV(max) ≥2.5 (P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: The positive predictive value of post-RT FDG-PET/CT may significantly improve using novel second derivative analysis of dynamic triphasic FDG-PET/CT SUV(max) slope, accurately distinguishing tumor from inflammation on positive and equivocal scans.
Authors: V J Lowe; J H Boyd; F R Dunphy; H Kim; T Dunleavy; B T Collins; D Martin; B C Stack; C Hollenbeak; J W Fletcher Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Min Yao; Michael M Graham; Russell B Smith; Kenneth J Dornfeld; Mark Skwarchuk; Henry T Hoffman; Gerry F Funk; Scott M Graham; Yusuf Menda; John M Buatti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Eric R Carlson; Josh Schaefferkoetter; David Townsend; J Michael McCoy; Paul D Campbell; Misty Long Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2012-06-26 Impact factor: 1.895
Authors: Min Yao; Henry T Hoffman; Kristi Chang; Gerry F Funk; Russell B Smith; Huaming Tan; Gerald H Clamon; Ken Dornfeld; John M Buatti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: H Young; R Baum; U Cremerius; K Herholz; O Hoekstra; A A Lammertsma; J Pruim; P Price Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Min Yao; Pifu Luo; Henry T Hoffman; Kristi Chang; Michael M Graham; Yusuf Menda; Huaming Tan; John M Buatti Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Johanna Sjövall; Ulrika Bitzén; Elisabeth Kjellén; Per Nilsson; Peter Wahlberg; Eva Brun Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-10-02 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Frederik Soffers; Nils Helsen; Tim Van den Wyngaert; Laurens Carp; Otto S Hoekstra; Laurence Goethals; Michel Martens; Kristof Deben; Karoline Spaepen; Remco De Bree; Frank De Geeter; G J C Zwezerijnen; Carl Van Laer; Alex Maes; Olivier Lenssen; Sigrid Stroobants Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 3.434
Authors: Reinhard R Beichel; Ethan J Ulrich; Brian J Smith; Christian Bauer; Bartley Brown; Thomas Casavant; John J Sunderland; Michael M Graham; John M Buatti Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-04-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Whitney Sumner; Sangwoo S Kim; Lucas Vitzthum; Kevin Moore; Todd Atwood; James Murphy; Sayuri Miyauchi; Joseph A Califano; Loren K Mell; Arno J Mundt; Andrew B Sharabi Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2021-08-09 Impact factor: 3.481