Literature DB >> 26321501

18-fluorodeoxy-glucose positron emission computed tomography as predictive of response after chemoradiation in oesophageal cancer patients.

Elena Elimova1, Xuemei Wang2, Elba Etchebehere3, Hironori Shiozaki1, Yusuke Shimodaira1, Roopma Wadhwa1, Venkatram Planjery1, Nikolaos Charalampakis1, Mariela A Blum1, Wayne Hofstetter4, Jeff H Lee5, Brian R Weston5, Manoop S Bhutani5, Jane E Rogers6, Dipen Maru7, Heath D Skinner8, Homer A Macapinlac3, Jaffer A Ajani9.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate if a baseline, an interim or a post-chemoradiation (CTRT) 18-fluorodeoxy-glucose positron emission computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) studies could provide information on pathologic response to CTRT and overall survival (OS).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients with histologically proven adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus, fit for trimodality therapy were prospectively enrolled. Most were men (93.5%), and had a stage III cancer (74.2%). Chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin/5-fluorouracil (45.2%) and taxane/5-fluorouracil (54.8%). All patients underwent a baseline, an interim (performed 12 ± 2 days after the onset of CTRT) and a post-CTRT 18F-FDG PET/CT study. The 18F-FDG PET/CT variables evaluated were at baseline, interim and post-CTRT studies maximum standardised uptake value (SUV max) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG). Clinical and 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters were correlated with pathologic complete response (pathCR) and OS.
RESULTS: Among the 31 patients studied, 61.3% achieved a clinical complete response (cCR) and 87.1% had surgery. The median OS was 35.1 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 19.9-NA). PathCR rate was 22.2%. There was only a marginal association between cCR and pathCR (p = 0.06). None of the other variables was predictive of pathCR. There was association between OS and baseline TLG (p = 0.03) at the optimal cutoff TLG value of 75.15. Additionally, TLG and ΔTLG post-CTRT were also associated with OS (p = 0.01 and 0.03, respectively).
CONCLUSION: None of the PET parameters is predictive of pathCR but TLG at baseline and post-CTRT are prognostic of OS.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  18F-FDG PET/CT; Chemoradiation; Early response evaluation; Gastroesophageal cancer; Pathologic response

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26321501      PMCID: PMC4663130          DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.07.044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  41 in total

Review 1.  The importance of PET in the diagnosis and response evaluation of esophageal cancer.

Authors:  K Ott; W Weber; J-R Siewert
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.429

2.  The role of overdiagnosis and reclassification in the marked increase of esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence.

Authors:  Heiko Pohl; H Gilbert Welch
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2005-01-19       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for evaluating early response during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Mark van Heijl; Jikke M Omloo; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Otto S Hoekstra; Ronald Boellaard; Patrick M Bossuyt; Olivier R Busch; Hugo W Tilanus; Maarten C Hulshof; Ate van der Gaast; Grard A Nieuwenhuijzen; Han J Bonenkamp; John Th Plukker; Miguel A Cuesta; Fiebo J Ten Kate; Jan Pruim; Herman van Dekken; Jacques J Bergman; Gerrit W Sloof; J Jan van Lanschot
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology.

Authors:  Mathieu Hatt; Dimitris Visvikis; Nidal M Albarghach; Florent Tixier; Olivier Pradier; Catherine Cheze-le Rest
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Characterization of pathologic complete response after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in carcinoma of the esophagus and outcome after pathologic complete response.

Authors:  Pooja Rohatgi; Stephen G Swisher; Arlene M Correa; Tsung-T Wu; Zhongxing Liao; Ritsuko Komaki; Garrett L Walsh; Ara A Vaporciyan; David C Rice; Jack A Roth; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Prognostic significance of baseline positron emission tomography and importance of clinical complete response in patients with esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Akihiro Suzuki; Lianchun Xiao; Yuki Hayashi; Homer A Macapinlac; James Welsh; Steven H Lin; Jeffrey H Lee; Manoop S Bhutani; Dipen M Maru; Wayne L Hofstetter; Stephen G Swisher; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  FDG PET and CT in locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the distal oesophagus. Clinical relevance of a discordant PET finding.

Authors:  A Stahl; J Stollfuss; K Ott; H Wieder; U Fink; M Schwaiger; W A Weber
Journal:  Nuklearmedizin       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.379

8.  American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system does not accurately predict survival in patients receiving multimodality therapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Nabil P Rizk; Ennapadam Venkatraman; Manjit S Bains; Bernard Park; Raja Flores; Laura Tang; David H Ilson; Bruce D Minsky; Valerie W Rusch
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-02-10       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Evaluation of early response to concomitant chemoradiotherapy by interim 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging in patients with locally advanced oesophageal carcinomas.

Authors:  Xavier Cuenca; Christophe Hennequin; Elif Hindié; Sofia Rivera; Laetitia Vercellino; Valérie Baruch-Hennequin; Jean-Marc Gornet; Pierre Cattan; Mircea Chirica; Laurent Quéro
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  Influence of the baseline 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography results on survival and pathologic response in patients with gastroesophageal cancer undergoing chemoradiation.

Authors:  Heta Javeri; Lianchun Xiao; Eric Rohren; Ritsuko Komaki; Wayne Hofstetter; Jeffrey H Lee; Dipen Maru; Manoop S Bhutani; Stephen G Swisher; Xuemei Wang; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-02-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  18 in total

1.  A study about different findings of PET-CT between neoadjuvant and non-neoadjuvant therapy: SUVmax is not a reliable predictor of lymphatic involvement after neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Jae Kil Park; Jae Jun Kim; Seok Whan Moon
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  PET/CT-Based Response Evaluation in Cancer-a Systematic Review of Design Issues.

Authors:  Oke Gerke; Karen Ehlers; Edith Motschall; Poul Flemming Høilund-Carlsen; Werner Vach
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 3.488

3.  Confirmation of the prognostic value of pretherapeutic tumor SUR and MTV in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Frank Hofheinz; Yimin Li; Ingo G Steffen; Qin Lin; Chen Lili; Wu Hua; Jörg van den Hoff; Sebastian Zschaeck
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission computed tomography for monitoring tumor response in esophageal carcinoma treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Peiliang Zhang; Zengyun Li; Dongqing Wang; Fuling Ma; Ran Zhang; Wanhua Liang; Mingping Sun; Zheng Fu; Xiaorong Sun
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2017-12-05       Impact factor: 2.967

5.  Multimodal Imaging of Pathologic Response to Chemoradiation in Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Penny Fang; Benjamin C Musall; Jong Bum Son; Amy C Moreno; Brian P Hobbs; Brett W Carter; Bryan M Fellman; Osama Mawlawi; Jingfei Ma; Steven H Lin
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Increased evidence for the prognostic value of FDG uptake on late-treatment PET in non-tumour-affected oesophagus in irradiated patients with oesophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Yimin Li; Frank Hofheinz; Christian Furth; Chen Lili; Wu Hua; Pirus Ghadjar; Sebastian Zschaeck
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-04-21       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 7.  Personalized therapy based on image for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Kazuto Harada; Dilsa Mizrak Kaya; Anthony Lopez; Hideo Baba; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-02

8.  Increased FDG uptake on late-treatment PET in non-tumour-affected oesophagus is prognostic for pathological complete response and disease recurrence in patients undergoing neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy.

Authors:  Sebastian Zschaeck; Frank Hofheinz; Klaus Zöphel; Rebecca Bütof; Christina Jentsch; Julia Schmollack; Steffen Löck; Jörg Kotzerke; Gustavo Baretton; Jürgen Weitz; Michael Baumann; Mechthild Krause
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-06-09       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  Preoperative Prediction of Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Patients With Esophageal Cancer Using 18F-FDG PET/CT and DW-MRI: A Prospective Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Alicia S Borggreve; Lucas Goense; Peter S N van Rossum; Sophie E Heethuis; Richard van Hillegersberg; Jan J W Lagendijk; Marnix G E H Lam; Astrid L H M W van Lier; Stella Mook; Jelle P Ruurda; Marco van Vulpen; Francine E M Voncken; Berthe M P Aleman; Annemarieke Bartels-Rutten; Jingfei Ma; Penny Fang; Benjamin C Musall; Steven H Lin; Gert J Meijer
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-01-25       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Trimodality therapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: the role of volume-based PET/CT in patient management and prognostication.

Authors:  Yeonu Choi; Joon Young Choi; Tae Hee Hong; Yoon-La Choi; Dongryul Oh; Sook Young Woo; Young Mog Shim; Jae Ill Zo; Hong Kwan Kim; Kyung Soo Lee
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-08-08       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.