| Literature DB >> 26857818 |
Noboru Nakaigawa1, Keiichi Kondo2, Ukihide Tateishi3, Ryogo Minamimoto3, Tomohiro Kaneta3, Kazuhiro Namura2, Daiki Ueno2, Kazuki Kobayashi4, Takeshi Kishida5, Ichiro Ikeda6, Hisashi Hasumi2, Kazuhide Makiyama2, Yoshinobu Kubota2, Tomio Inoue3, Masahiro Yao2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Various molecular-targeting therapies have become available for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Accurate prognostication is desirable for choosing the appropriate treatment for individual patients. (18)F-2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) is a non-invasive tool for evaluating glucose accumulation, which can be an index of biological characteristics of cancer. We prospectively evaluated FDG PET/CT as a prognostic indicator in patients with advanced RCC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26857818 PMCID: PMC4746884 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2097-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Patients characteristics
| Characteristic | No. of patients (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No. of patients | 101 | ||
| Sex | |||
| Male | 83 | (82) | |
| Female | 18 | (18) | |
| Age, years | |||
| Median (Range) | 65 | (32–82) | |
| Pathology | |||
| Clear cell | 86 | (85) | |
| Papillary | 6 | (6) | |
| Clear cell/Sarcomatoid | 4 | (4) | |
| Sarcomatoid | 2 | (2) | |
| Hemodialyssis | 2 | (2) | |
| Unclassified | 1 | (1) | |
| Prior nephrectomy | |||
| Yes | 77 | (76) | |
| No | 24 | (24) | |
| Disease status | |||
| Recurrent | 61 | (60) | |
| Metastatic | 58 | (57) | |
| Regional | 3 | (3) | |
| Stage IV | 40 | (40) | |
| Locoregional | 4 | (4) | |
| Metastatic | 36 | (36) | |
| Prior systematic Therapy | |||
| Yes | 17 | (17) | |
| IFN-α | 9 | ||
| IFN-α/sorafenib | 2 | ||
| Sorafenib | 2 | ||
| Sunitinib | 1 | ||
| S-1 | 1 | ||
| IFN-α/UFT | 1 | ||
| Sorafenib/Temsirolimus | 1 | ||
| No | 84 | 83 | |
Abbreviation: IFN-α interferon-α
Interventions after PET/CT evaluation
| Interventions | No. of patients | (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single intervention | 44 | (44) | |
| Sunitinib | 19 | ||
| Sorafenib | 20 | ||
| IFN-α | 4 | ||
| Temsirolimus | 1 | ||
| 2 interventions | 22 | (22) | |
| TKI to mTORI | 10 | ||
| TKI to TKI | 9 | ||
| mTORI to TKI | 3 | ||
| 3 interventions | 20 | (20) | |
| 3 < interventions | 15 | (15) | |
| TKI | 96 | (95) | |
| mTORI | 39 | (39) | |
| IFN-α | 16 | (16) | |
| Metastasectomy | 6 | (6) | |
| Nephrectomy | 5 | (5) | |
Abbrebiations: IFN-α interferon-α, TKI tyrosine kinase inhibitor, mTORI mTOR inhibitor
Fig. 1The association of pretreatment max SUVmax and survival. The vertical axis plots the pretreatment max SUVmax of individual patients, and the horizontal axis plots their survival. Open circles are the patients who were alive on the last observation days and closed circles are the patients dead as a result of cancer
Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses of max SUVmax versus standard prognostic factors for advanced RCC
| Univariate cox analyses | Multivariate cox analyses | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk Fcotr | P value | HR | 95 % CI | P value | HR | 95 % CI |
| max SUVmax (continuous variable) | <0.001 | 1.257 | 1.177-1.342 | <0.001 | 1.265 | 1.159-1.380 |
| Karnofsky performance status (<80 %) | 0.036 | 2.107 | 1.051–4.221 | 0.296 | 0.623 | 0.256–1.514 |
| Lactate dehydrogenase (>1.5x upper limit of normal) | <0.001 | 8.655 | 3.559–21.049 | 0.001 | 5.026 | 1.935–13.052 |
| Corrected calcium (>10 mg/dl) | 0.014 | 2.457 | 1.198–5.038 | 0.151 | 1.943 | 0.784–4.815 |
| Hemoglobin (<lower limit of normal) | 0.121 | 1.810 | 0.854–3.833 | |||
| Interval from initial diagnosis to treatment (<1 year) | 0.014 | 1.937 | 1.142–3.286 | 0.164 | 1.549 | 0.836–2.870 |
| Age (>65 years old) | 0.416 | 0.803 | 0.474–1.361 | |||
| Sex (male or female) | 0.890 | 1.046 | 0.551–1.984 | |||
| Pathology (clear or non–clear) | 0.044 | 2.113 | 1.021–4.373 | 0.962 | 0.980 | 0.419–2.291 |
Fig. 2Validation of the cutoff point used in the preliminary report. We validated the usefulness of max SUVmax 8.8 [12], focusing on the 77 patients who were enrolled after the preliminary analysis
Fig. 3Overall survival curve of total 101 patients stratified by two cutoff points, max SUVmax 7.0 and 12.0
Fig. 4The features of FDG PET/CT and prognosis. (a, b, c) A case with ovarian recurrence and a max SUVmax of 3.2. (d, e, f) A case with a primary tumor and a max SUVmax of 5.2. (g, h, i) A case with lung metastasis and a max SUVmax of 9.4. (j, k, l) A case with submandibular lymph node metastasis and a max SUVmax of 11.0. (m, n, o) A case with a primary tumor and a max SUVmax of 14.3. a d g j m: CT imaging. b e h k n: PET images. c f i l o: fusion images. mo=month. CD=cancer death