Literature DB >> 26440571

Correlation between early 18F-FDG PET/CT response to BRAF and MEK inhibition and survival in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma.

Ronald J Schmitt1, Sarah M Kreidler, Deborah H Glueck, Rodabe N Amaria, Rene Gonzalez, Karl Lewis, Brian M Bagrosky, Jennifer J Kwak, Phillip J Koo.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Metabolic response to treatment measured by fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET has prognostic implications in many cancers. This study investigated the association between survival and early changes on (18)F-FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma receiving combined BRAF and MEK inhibition therapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall, 24 patients with advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma were included. Patients were treated with a BRAF inhibitor (vemurafenib or dabrafenib) and a MEK inhibitor (cobimetinib or trametinib), and were imaged at baseline and shortly thereafter with (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Each scan yielded two values of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax): one for the most metabolically active focus and one for the least responsive focus. Short-term treatment response was assessed by evaluating the target lesions using the EROTC criteria. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to examine associations between overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and changes in SUVmax.
RESULTS: The mean time to follow-up (18)F-FDG PET/CT was 26 days. At follow-up, two patients achieved a complete response. For the most metabolically active focus, 22 patients showed a partial response. For the least responsive focus, 18 patients showed a partial response, two had stable disease, and two had progressive disease.A total of 16 patients were alive at the end of the study. For the most metabolically active tumor, no association was observed between changes in SUVmax and OS (P=0.73) or PFS (P=0.17). For the least responsive tumor, change in SUVmax was associated with PFS [hazard ratio (HR)=1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-1.71, P=0.01], but not OS (P=0.52). The ECOG score was associated with OS (HR=11.81, 95% CI: 1.42-97.60, P=0.02) and PFS (HR=24.72, 95% CI: 3.23-189.42, P=0.002).
CONCLUSION: Change in SUVmax for the least responsive tumor and baseline functional performance may be useful prognostic indicators for PFS in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26440571      PMCID: PMC4689629          DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000406

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Med Commun        ISSN: 0143-3636            Impact factor:   1.690


  26 in total

1.  18F-FDG PET after 2 cycles of ABVD predicts event-free survival in early and advanced Hodgkin lymphoma.

Authors:  Juliano J Cerci; Luís F Pracchia; Camila C G Linardi; Felipe A Pitella; Dominique Delbeke; Marisa Izaki; Evelinda Trindade; José Soares; Valeria Buccheri; José C Meneghetti
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 10.057

2.  Prevalence of exon 15 BRAF mutations in primary melanoma of the superficial spreading, nodular, acral, and lentigo maligna subtypes.

Authors:  Julie Lang; Rona M MacKie
Journal:  J Invest Dermatol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 8.551

3.  Quantitative analysis of response to treatment with erlotinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer using 18F-FDG and 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine PET.

Authors:  Deniz Kahraman; Matthias Scheffler; Thomas Zander; Lucia Nogova; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Ronald Boellaard; Bernd Neumaier; Roland T Ullrich; Arne Holstein; Markus Dietlein; Jürgen Wolf; Carsten Kobe
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2011-11-07       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Distinct sets of genetic alterations in melanoma.

Authors:  John A Curtin; Jane Fridlyand; Toshiro Kageshita; Hetal N Patel; Klaus J Busam; Heinz Kutzner; Kwang-Hyun Cho; Setsuya Aiba; Eva-Bettina Bröcker; Philip E LeBoit; Dan Pinkel; Boris C Bastian
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-11-17       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Response assessment by combined PET-CT scan versus CT scan alone using RECIST in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  V A Passero; B F Branstetter; Y Shuai; D E Heron; M K Gibson; S Y Lai; S W Kim; J R Grandis; R L Ferris; J T Johnson; A Argiris
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 32.976

6.  BRAF mutation predicts sensitivity to MEK inhibition.

Authors:  David B Solit; Levi A Garraway; Christine A Pratilas; Ayana Sawai; Gad Getz; Andrea Basso; Qing Ye; Jose M Lobo; Yuhong She; Iman Osman; Todd R Golub; Judith Sebolt-Leopold; William R Sellers; Neal Rosen
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-11-06       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Marked, homogeneous, and early [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography responses to vemurafenib in BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma.

Authors:  Grant A McArthur; Igor Puzanov; Ravi Amaravadi; Antoni Ribas; Paul Chapman; Kevin B Kim; Jeffrey A Sosman; Richard J Lee; Keith Nolop; Keith T Flaherty; Jason Callahan; Rodney J Hicks
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-03-26       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group.

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

Review 9.  FDG-PET/CT in lymphoma.

Authors:  Malik E Juweid
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2011

10.  Early metabolic response using FDG PET/CT and molecular phenotypes of breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Bhumsuk Keam; Seock-Ah Im; Youngil Koh; Sae-Won Han; Do-Youn Oh; Nariya Cho; Jee Hyun Kim; Wonshik Han; Keon Wook Kang; Woo Kyung Moon; Tae-You Kim; In Ae Park; Dong-Young Noh; June-Key Chung; Yung-Jue Bang
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 4.430

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Precision Medicine and PET/Computed Tomography in Melanoma.

Authors:  Esther Mena; Yasemin Sanli; Charles Marcus; Rathan M Subramaniam
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2017-07-14

Review 2.  [Response evaluation in nuclear medicine : Criteria, results and pitfalls].

Authors:  J Hoffend; C Sachpekidis; A Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Case Report: Combined CDK4/6 and MEK Inhibition in Refractory CDKN2A and NRAS Mutant Melanoma.

Authors:  Andrea Forschner; Tobias Sinnberg; Gabi Mroz; Christopher Schroeder; Christian Philipp Reinert; Sergios Gatidis; Michael Bitzer; Thomas Eigentler; Claus Garbe; Heike Niessner; Martin Röcken; Cristiana Roggia; Sorin Armeanu-Ebinger; Olaf Riess; Sven Mattern; Dominik Nann; Irina Bonzheim
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 4.  Molecularly targeted therapies in cancer: a guide for the nuclear medicine physician.

Authors:  S Lheureux; C Denoyelle; P S Ohashi; J S De Bono; F M Mottaghy
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Therapeutic efficacy and safety of combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in patients with malignant melanoma: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Peng Chen; Fuchao Chen; Benhong Zhou
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Correlation between circulating tumour DNA and metabolic tumour burden in metastatic melanoma patients.

Authors:  Ashleigh C McEvoy; Lydia Warburton; Zeyad Al-Ogaili; Liesl Celliers; Leslie Calapre; Michelle R Pereira; Muhammad A Khattak; Tarek M Meniawy; Michael Millward; Melanie Ziman; Elin S Gray
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-07-09       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Tumor response assessment by the single-lesion measurement per organ in small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Soong Goo Jung; Jung Han Kim; Hyeong Su Kim; Kyoung Ju Kim; Ik Yang
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 5.087

Review 8.  Comparison of the RECIST 1.0 and RECIST 1.1 in patients treated with targeted agents: a pooled analysis and review.

Authors:  Jung Han Kim
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-03-22

Review 9.  Comparison of the RECIST and PERCIST criteria in solid tumors: a pooled analysis and review.

Authors:  Seon Jeong Min; Hyun Joo Jang; Jung Han Kim
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2016-05-10

10.  18F-FDG-PET/CT and diffusion-weighted MRI for monitoring a BRAF and CDK 4/6 inhibitor combination therapy in a murine model of human melanoma.

Authors:  Ralf S Eschbach; Philipp M Kazmierczak; Maurice M Heimer; Andrei Todica; Heidrun Hirner-Eppeneder; Moritz J Schneider; Georg Keinrath; Olga Solyanik; Jessica Olivier; Wolfgang G Kunz; Maximilian F Reiser; Peter Bartenstein; Jens Ricke; Clemens C Cyran
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 3.909

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.