Dietmar Tamandl1, Julie Ta2, Rainer Schmid3, Matthias Preusser4, Matthias Paireder5, Sebastian F Schoppmann5, Alexander Haug2, Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah2. 1. Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Comprehensive Cancer Center GET-Unit, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: dietmar.tamandl@meduniwien.ac.at. 2. Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Comprehensive Cancer Center GET-Unit, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Comprehensive Cancer Center GET-Unit, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Comprehensive Cancer Center GET-Unit, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 4. Department of Medicine I, Comprehensive Cancer Center GET-Unit, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 5. Department of Surgery, Upper-GI-Service, Comprehensive Cancer Center GET-Unit, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic value of volumetric parameters measured with PET/CT in patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal cancer (EC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 71 patients (33 adenocarcinoma [AC] and 38 squamous cell carcinoma [ESCC]) with unresectable or metastatic EC who had PET/CT prior to palliative treatment. Volumetric parameters (metabolic tumor volume [MTV], total lesion glycolysis [TLG], tumor length [TL]) as well as maximum and mean standardized uptake (SUVmax, SUVmean) were obtained from (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies. The correlation between overall survival (OS) and established clinical parameters was assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: ESCC patients had higher SUVmax and SUVmean compared to AC (p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively). There was an association of lower SUVmax and SUVmean with metastatic compared to locally advanced tumors (e.g., median SUVmax stage IV: 14.9, 95% confidence interval [95% CI 4.4-35.5] vs. stage IIIA-C: 23.3 [9.2-40.6], p=0.017). TL, MTV and TLG showed an association to OS for all patients and for the subgroup of AC patients (AC; TL: Hazard ratio [HR] 3.23, [95% CI 1.03-10.11], p=0.044; MTV: HR 3.16, [95% CI 1.08-9.23], p=0.035). There was no correlation between PET parameters and survival in ESCC patients. Clinical nodal status was the only clinical variable associated to OS (HR 2.45 [95% CI 1.26-4.75], p=0.008) in AC patients. In a multivariate analysis, nodal status and MTV remained as independent factors associated to OS (N: HR 9.98, [95% CI 1.28-78.11], p=0.028; MTV: HR 1.02, [95% CI 1.01-1.03], p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: MTV predicted poor OS in patients with advanced AC. No PET parameters were associated to OS in ESCC patients.
PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic value of volumetric parameters measured with PET/CT in patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal cancer (EC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 71 patients (33 adenocarcinoma [AC] and 38 squamous cell carcinoma [ESCC]) with unresectable or metastatic EC who had PET/CT prior to palliative treatment. Volumetric parameters (metabolic tumor volume [MTV], total lesion glycolysis [TLG], tumor length [TL]) as well as maximum and mean standardized uptake (SUVmax, SUVmean) were obtained from (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies. The correlation between overall survival (OS) and established clinical parameters was assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: ESCC patients had higher SUVmax and SUVmean compared to AC (p=0.002 and p<0.001, respectively). There was an association of lower SUVmax and SUVmean with metastatic compared to locally advanced tumors (e.g., median SUVmax stage IV: 14.9, 95% confidence interval [95% CI 4.4-35.5] vs. stage IIIA-C: 23.3 [9.2-40.6], p=0.017). TL, MTV and TLG showed an association to OS for all patients and for the subgroup of AC patients (AC; TL: Hazard ratio [HR] 3.23, [95% CI 1.03-10.11], p=0.044; MTV: HR 3.16, [95% CI 1.08-9.23], p=0.035). There was no correlation between PET parameters and survival in ESCC patients. Clinical nodal status was the only clinical variable associated to OS (HR 2.45 [95% CI 1.26-4.75], p=0.008) in AC patients. In a multivariate analysis, nodal status and MTV remained as independent factors associated to OS (N: HR 9.98, [95% CI 1.28-78.11], p=0.028; MTV: HR 1.02, [95% CI 1.01-1.03], p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS:MTV predicted poor OS in patients with advanced AC. No PET parameters were associated to OS in ESCC patients.
Authors: Francesco Giganti; Alessandro Ambrosi; Antonio Esposito; Alessandro Del Maschio; Francesco De Cobelli Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-01-30 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Kieran G Foley; Adam Christian; James Peaker; Christopher Marshall; Emiliano Spezi; Howard Kynaston; Ashley Roberts Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-05-08 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Varun Manoharan; Soon Lee; Shanley Chong; June Yap; Nick Coupe; Robert Wilson; Neil Merrett; Weng Ng; Michael Lin Journal: Ann Nucl Med Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 2.668
Authors: G Paone; F Martucci; V Espeli; L Ceriani; G Treglia; T Ruberto; A Richetti; R Piantanida; L Giovanella Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Tineke W H Meijer; Monika G Looijen-Salamon; Jasper Lok; Michel van den Heuvel; Bastiaan Tops; Johannes H A M Kaanders; Paul N Span; Johan Bussink Journal: Thorac Cancer Date: 2019-10-30 Impact factor: 3.500