| Literature DB >> 26911200 |
Angelita Habr-Gama1,2, Rodrigo O Perez3,4,5, Guilherme P São Julião6, Igor Proscurshim7, Laura M Fernandez8, Marleny N Figueiredo9, Joaquim Gama-Rodrigues10,11, Carlos A Buchpiguel12.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant CRT may lead to significant tumor regression in patients with rectal cancer. Different CRT regimens with consolidation chemotherapy may lead to increased rates of complete tumor regression. The purpose of this study was to understand tumor metabolic activity following two different neoadjuvant CRT regimens using sequential PET/CT imaging in two different intervals following RT.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26911200 PMCID: PMC4766749 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-016-0598-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Oncol ISSN: 1748-717X Impact factor: 3.481
Fig. 1CRT regimens and PET/CT timing during treatment. a Standard CRT regimen – 54Gy of radiation associated to 2 cycles of 5FU based chemotherapy; b Consolidation CRT regimen – 54Gy of radiation associated to 6 cycles of 5FU based chemotherapy
Patient’s characteristics and baseline tumor features
| Standard CRT | Extended CRT |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | 99 | 12 | ||
| Gender (M-F) | 47 – 52 (47.5 – 52.5) | 7 – 5 (58.3 – 41.7) | 0.48 | |
| Age (years) | 60.3 ± 12.7 | 58.6 ± 8.4 | 0.53 | |
| Tumor size (mm) | 43.2 ± 11.6 | 43.3 ± 6.5 | 0.96 | |
| Distance anal verge (cm) | 3.9 ± 2.0 | 4.6 ± 1.3 | 0.13 | |
| Initial Staging | ||||
| cT | 2 | 6 (6.1 %) | 5 (41.7 %) | |
| 3 | 87 (87.9 %) | 7 (58.3 %) | ||
| 4 | 6 (6.1 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | 0.001 | |
| cN | positive | 43 (43.4 %) | 8 (66.7 %) | 0.11 |
| cUICC | I | 6 (6.1 %) | 3 (25.0 %) | |
| II | 50 (50.5 %) | 1 (8.3 %) | ||
| III | 43 (43.4 %) | 8 (66.7 %) | 0.006 | |
| TRG 3 or 4 | 22 (30.1 %) | 3 (75.0 %) | 0.09 | |
| CR (cCR or pCR) | 23 (23.2 %) | 8 (66.7 %) | 0.004 | |
| Final tumor size (mm) | 40.6 ± 22.2 | 26.4 ± 7.9 | 0.01 | |
| Final Staging | ||||
| UICC | CCR | 16 (16.1 %) | 7 (58.4 %) | |
| pCR | 7 (7.1 %) | 1 (8.3 %) | ||
| I | 14 (14.1 %) | 1 (8.3 %) | ||
| II | 30 (30.3 %) | 0 (0.0 %) | ||
| III | 19 (19.2 %) | 2 (16.7 %) | 0.004 | |
Fig. 2a PET/CT imaging (baseline / 6 weeks / 12 weeks) in a patient that developed complete clinical response; b MR imaging from the same patient at baseline and at 12 weeks after CRT
PET/CT characteristics according to neoadjuvant CRT regimen
| Standard CRT | Extended CRT |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline SUVmax | 21.5 ± 11.0 | 14.8 ± 5.9 | 0.004 |
| 6 weeks SUVmax | 7.3 ± 6.3 | 1.9 ± 1.8 | 0.001 |
| 12 weeks SUVmax | 8.4 ± 7.4 | 1.3 ± 1.9 | 0.001 |
| Complete Response | 18 (18.2 %) | 8 (66.7 %) | 0.001 |
| ∆ %SUVmax variation (6 weeks - baseline) | 63.8 ± 24.1 | 88.1 ± 10.4 | 0.001 |
| ∆ %SUVmax variation (12 weeks - baseline) | 57.9 ± 31.5 | 90.7 ± 13.0 | 0.001 |
Fig. 3Variation in SUVmax between baseline and 6 and 12-week PET/CT; Patients undergoing consolidation CRT had significant increased variation between baseline and 6 or 12-week PET/CT (<0.001)