| Literature DB >> 26368542 |
Gun Oh Chong1, Shin Young Jeong2, Shin-Hyung Park3, Yoon Hee Lee1, Sang-Woo Lee2, Dae Gy Hong1, Jae-Chul Kim3, Yoon Soon Lee1, Young Lae Cho1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the metabolic parameters of primary tumors and regional lymph nodes, as measured by pre-treatment F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (F-18 FDG PET/CT) to compare the prognostic value for the prediction of tumor recurrence. This study also identified the most powerful parameter in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26368542 PMCID: PMC4569279 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137743
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Distribution of the clinical characteristics and metabolic parameters according to regional lymph node SUVmax (high and low).
| Variable | All patients (N = 56) | Nodal SUVmax ≤4.7 (N = 25) | Nodal SUVmax >4.7 (N = 31) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 51.5 ± 10.3 | 53.2 ± 11.3 | 50.1 ± 10.4 | 0.286 |
| FIGO stage (N, %) | 0.041 | |||
| IIB | 44 (78.6%) | 22 (88.0%) | 22 (71.0%) | |
| IIIA1 | 2 (3.6%) | 2 (8.0%) | 0 (0%) | |
| IIIA2 | 5 (8.9%) | 1 (4.0%) | 4 (12.9%) | |
| IIIB | 5 (8.9%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (16.1%) | |
| Histology (N, %) | 0.020 | |||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 50 (89.3%) | 25 (100.0%) | 25 (80.6%) | |
| Adenocarcinoma | 6 (10.7%) | 0 (0%) | 6 (19.4%) | |
| Primary tumor size (cm) | 4.6 ± 1.7 | 4.1 ± 1.2 | 5.1 ± 1.9 | 0.045 |
| Paraaortic lymph node metastasis (N, %) | 13 (23.2%) | 4 (16.0%) | 9 (29.0%) | 0.251 |
| Primary tumor SUVmax | 16.9 ± 9.3 | 16.9 ± 9.5 | 16.8 ± 9.3 | 0.954 |
| Primary tumor MTV | 99.0 ± 116.8 | 66.5 ± 51.0 | 125.2 ± 146.1 | 0.044 |
| Primary tumor TLG | 753.9 ± 971.9 | 516.26 ± 564.5 | 945.5 ± 1179.7 | 0.081 |
| Nodal SUVmax | 7.5 ± 7.1 | 3.4 ± 0.7 | 10.9 ± 8.2 | <0.001 |
| Nodal MTV | 16.0 ± 33.5 | 2.6 ± 2.6 | 26.8 ± 42.2 | 0.003 |
| Nodal TLG | 72.5 ± 179.2 | 6.8 ± 5.8 | 125.9 ± 222.8 | 0.007 |
FIGO = International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; SUVmax = maximum standardized uptake value; MTV = whole-body metabolic tumor volume; TLG = total lesion glycolysis
Treatment response and recurrence patterns according to the SUVmax of the regional lymph nodes (high and low).
| Variables | All patients (N = 56) | Nodal SUVmax ≤4.7 (N = 25) | Nodal SUVmax >4.7 (N = 37) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response (N, %) | 0.032 | |||
| Complete response | 37 (66.1%) | 21 (84.0%) | 16 (51.6%) | |
| Partial response | 17 (30.4%) | 4 (16.0%) | 13 (41.9%) | |
| Progressive disease | 2 (3.6%) | 0 (0%) | 2 (6.5%) | |
| Recurrence (N, %) | 0.002 | |||
| Local | 5 (8.9%) | 2 (8.0%) | 3 (9.7%) | |
| Distant | 5 (8.9%) | 0 (0%) | 5 (16.1%) | |
| Combined | 8 (14.3%) | 0 (0%) | 8 (25.8%) | |
SUVmax = maximum standardized uptake
Fig 1Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for the prediction of recurrence according to the nodal maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax).
The area under the curve was 0.668 (p = 0.044, 95% confidence interval 0.519–0.817), and 4.7 was determined to be the cutoff comparison value for the nodal SUVmax.
Fig 2Kaplan-Meier survival plots of disease-free survival according to the metabolic PET parameters.
Kaplan-Meier survival plots of disease-free survival according to (a) the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the primary tumor, (b) the metabolic tumor volume (MTV) of the primary tumor, (c) total lesion glycolysis (TLG) of the primary tumor, (d) the SUVmax of the regional lymph nodes, (e) the MTV of the regional lymph nodes, and (f) TLG of the regional lymph nodes.
Univariate and multivariate analyses of clinical variables and quantitative metabolic parameters for disease-free survival.
| Variables | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI |
| HR | 95% CI |
| |
| Age (years) <45 vs. ≥45 | 1.030 | 0.6–4.2 | 0.310 | |||
| Primary tumor SUVmax >12.3 vs. ≤12.3 | 0.673 | 0.5–4.0 | 0.412 | |||
| Primary tumor MTV >63.7 cm3 vs. ≤63.7 cm3 | 2.172 | 0.8–5.6 | 0.141 | |||
| Primary tumor TLG >411.9 vs. ≤411.9 | 2.294 | 0.8–5.8 | 0.130 | |||
| Nodal SUVmax >4.7 vs. ≤4.7 | 7.592 | 1.8–34.8 | 0.006 | 4.158 | 1.1–22.7 | 0.041 |
| Nodal MTV >10.3 cm3 vs. ≤10.3 cm3 | 6.015 | 1.3–9.2 | 0.014 | |||
| Nodal TLG >32.9 vs. ≤32.9 | 6.266 | 1.3–9.4 | 0.012 | |||
| FIGO stage >IIB vs. IIB | 1.695 | 0.7–5.2 | 0.193 | |||
| Tumor size ≥4 cm vs. <4 cm | 0.811 | 0.5–5.1 | 0.368 | |||
| Paraaortic node metastases | 5.393 | 1.2–8.5 | 0.020 | |||
| Post-treatment response PR or PD vs. CR | 13.289 | 2.4–17.0 | <0.001 | 7.162 | 1.5–11.3 | 0.007 |
SUVmax = maximum standardized uptake value; MTV = whole-body metabolic tumor volume; TLG = total lesion glycolysis; FIGO = International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics; CR = complete response; PR = partial response; PD = progressive disease; HR = hazard ratio; CI = confidence interval.