| Literature DB >> 26984385 |
Fernanda G Herrera1, Thomas Breuneval1, John O Prior2, Jean Bourhis1, Mahmut Ozsahin3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the prognostic value of different anatomical and functional metabolic parameters determined using [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT with other clinical and pathological prognostic parameters in cervical cancer (CC).Entities:
Keywords: Cervical cancer; Chemo-radiotherapy; Standard uptake value; Tumor glycolytic volume; [18F]FDG-PET/CT
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26984385 PMCID: PMC4793502 DOI: 10.1186/s13014-016-0614-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiat Oncol ISSN: 1748-717X Impact factor: 3.481
Patient and tumor characteristics in 38 patients treated with cervical cancer treated with chemo-radiotherapy
| FIGO stage |
| Percent |
|---|---|---|
| IB1 | 2 | 5.2 |
| IB2 | 4 | 10.5 |
| IIA1 | 6 | 15.7 |
| IIA2 | 4 | 10.5 |
| IIB | 15 | 39.5 |
| IIIA | 2 | 5.2 |
| IIIB | 4 | 10.5 |
| IVA | 1 | 2.6 |
| Histology | ||
| Squamous-cell carcinoma | 33 | 87 |
| Adenocarcinoma | 5 | 13 |
| Grade | ||
| 1 | 8 | 21 |
| 2 | 23 | 60.5 |
| 3 | 7 | 18.5 |
| Lymph nodal status | ||
| Pelvic positive | 10 | 26.3 |
| Pelvic and para-aortic positive | 12 | 31.6 |
| Negative lymph nodes | 16 | 42.1 |
| Lymphovascular space invasion | ||
| Positive | 26 | 68.4 |
| Negative | 12 | 31.5 |
Univariate analysis in 38 patients treated with cervical cancer treated with chemo-radiotherapy
| Variable |
| 3-y OS (%) | 95 % CI |
| 3-y DFS (%) | 95 % CI |
| 3-y LRC (%) | 95 % CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All patients | 38 | 71 | 54–88 | - | 61 | 44–78 | - | 76 | 62–90 | - |
| Age (years) | ||||||||||
| <50 | 22 | 41 | 27–49 | 63 | 61–65 | 72 | 69–75 | |||
| 0.35 | 0.7 | 0.85 | ||||||||
| >50 | 16 | 78 | 74–82 | 53 | 50–56 | 77 | 60–94 | |||
| Tumor size | ||||||||||
| ≥4.5 cm | 15 | 63 | 61–65 | 57 | 55–59 | 65 | 63–67 | |||
| 0.5 | 0.56 | 0.19 | ||||||||
| <4.5 cm | 23 | 82 | 80–84 | 68 | 65–71 | 84 | 68–100 | |||
| Stage FIGO 2009 | ||||||||||
| IB1, IIA1, IB2 | 8 | 71 | 68–74 | 57 | 55–59 | 71 | 67–75 | |||
| IIA2, IIB | 23 | 74 | 69–79 | 0.9 | 62 | 60–64 | 0.84 | 77 | 60–94 | 0.84 |
| IIIA, IIIB, IVA | 7 | 60 | 56–64 | 60 | 56–64 | 75 | 71–79 | |||
| Histology | ||||||||||
| SCC | 33 | 75 | 58–92 | 65 | 48–82 | 0.02* | 79 | 65–93 | ||
| 0.02* | 0.15 | |||||||||
| Adenocarcinoma | 5 | 50 | 45–55 | 26 | 21–31 | 50 | 45–55 | |||
| LVSI | ||||||||||
| Positive | 26 | 63 | 60–66 | 58 | 56–60 | 72 | 53–91 | |||
| 0.87 | 0.62 | 0.55 | ||||||||
| Negative | 12 | 65 | 62–68 | 66 | 63–69 | 83 | 81–85 | |||
| Grade | ||||||||||
| 1 | 3 | 66 | 61–71 | 66 | 61–71 | 66 | 61–71 | |||
| 2 | 18 | 56 | 54–58 | 0.81 | 53 | 52–55 | 0.92 | 85 | 71–99 | 0.33 |
| 3 | 17 | 84 | 82–86 | 69 | 67–71 | 69 | 67–71 | |||
| Lymph nodes | ||||||||||
| Positive | 22 | 55 | 52–58 | 60 | 57–63 | 76 | 58–94 | |||
| 0.44 | 0.66 | 0.79 | ||||||||
| Negative | 16 | 74 | 72–76 | 62 | 60–62 | 76 | 74–78 | |||
| Hemoglobin (g/dl) | ||||||||||
| ≥100 | 34 | 72 | 55–89 | 64 | 47–81 | 77 | 63–91 | |||
| 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.46 | ||||||||
| <100 | 4 | 50 | 43–57 | 66 | 61–71 | 66 | 61–71 | |||
| WBC (x103/ml) | ||||||||||
| ≥8.5 | 19 | 66 | 63–69 | 61 | 59–63 | 73 | 71–75 | |||
| 0.95 | 0.83 | 0.44 | ||||||||
| <8.5 | 19 | 65 | 62–67 | 61 | 59–63 | 79 | 77–81 | |||
| Median TGV (cm3) | ||||||||||
| ≥255 | 19 | 59 | 57–61 | 52 | 50–54 | 69 | 66–72 | |||
| 0.2 | 0.25 | 0.38 | ||||||||
| <255 | 19 | 79 | 77–81 | 70 | 68–72 | 82 | 65–99 | |||
| TGV interquartile range (cm3) | ||||||||||
| ≥562 | 29 | 37 | 27–43 | 33 | 30–36 | 55 | 52–58 | |||
| 0.01* | 0.002* | 0.005* | ||||||||
| <562 | 9 | 76 | 58–94 | 70 | 52–88 | 83 | 68–98 | |||
| Tumor mean SUV (g/ml) | ||||||||||
| ≥5 | 19 | 57 | 54–59 | 36 | 33–39 | 65 | 63–68 | |||
| 0.03* | 0.004* | 0.04* | ||||||||
| <5 | 19 | 86 | 72–100 | 88 | 70–100 | 88 | 78–98 | |||
| Mean tumor SUVmax (g/ml) | ||||||||||
| ≥15 | 14 | 61 | 55–65 | 53 | 45–58 | 62 | 58–69 | |||
| 0.78 | 0.51 | 0.09 | ||||||||
| <15 | 24 | 78 | 73–83 | 66 | 60–72 | 85 | 75–90 | |||
| Three-month post-treatment PET metabolic response | ||||||||||
| CMR | 29 | 80 | 78–82 | 83 | 96 | 93–99 | ||||
| 0.0008* | 68–98 | <0.0001* | <0.0001* | |||||||
| PMR | 9 | 30 | 27–33 | 0 | 22 | 19–25 | ||||
| MTV | ||||||||||
| ≥69 cc | 19 | 58 | 35–39 | 63 | 61–65 | 73 | 71–75 | |||
| 0.65 | 0.47 | 0.35 | ||||||||
| <69 cc | 19 | 73 | 55–61 | 63 | 61–65 | 81 | 62–100 | |||
| Group | ||||||||||
| A + C | 8 | 83 | 53–100 | 83 | 53–100 | 83 | 54–100 | |||
| B + C | 11 | 87 | 64–100 | 0.003* | 90 | 73–100 | 0.0003* | 90 | 73–100 | 0.03* |
| A + D | 11 | 68 | 38–98 | 50 | 19–81 | 78 | 52–100 | |||
| B + D | 8 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 0–55 | 50 | 16–84 |
Table abbreviations:
OS Overall survival, DFS Disease-free survival, LRC Loco-regional control, CI Confidence interval, FIGO International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system, TGV Total glycolytic activity within the tumor volume, SUV Standardized uptake value, SUVmax Maximum SUV, MTV Metabolic tumor volume, SCC Squamous cell carcinoma, LVSI Lympho-vascular space invasion, WBC White blood cells, CMR Complete metabolic response, PMR Partial metabolic response
Group categories: Group A + C: Patients with MTV below the median + patients with mean SUV below the median. Group A + D: Patients with MTV below the median + patients with mean SUV above the median. Group B + C: Patients with MTV above the median + patients with mean SUV below the median. Group B + D: Patients with MTV above the median + patients with mean SUV above the median
*p-values statistically significant
Fig. 1Univariate analysis. [18F]FDG-PET/CT Standard uptake value (SUV) mean cutoff ≥5 (blue curve) before starting chemo-radiotherapy unfavorably influenced: a) Overall survival (86 vs. 57 %, p = 0.03), b) Disease-free survival (88 vs. 36 %, p = 0.004), and c) Locoregional control (88 vs. 65 %, p = 0.04)
Fig. 2Univariate analysis. [18F]FDG-PET/CT tumor glycolytic volume (cutoff ≥562) before starting chemo-radiotherapy unfavorably (blue curve) influenced: a) Overall survival (37 vs. 76 %, p = 0.01), b) Disease-free survival (33 vs. 70 %, p = 0.002), and c) Locoregional control (55 vs. 83 %, p = 0.04)
Fig. 3Univariate analysis. [18F]FDG-PET/CT partial tumor metabolic response after treatment unfavorable (blue curve) influenced: a) Overall survival (9 vs. 29 %, p = 0.0008); b) Disease-free survival (0 vs. 83 %, p < 0.0001); and c) Locoregional control (22 vs. 96 %, p < 0.0001)
Fig. 4Univariate analysis. Subgroup analysis based on the dichotomization of MTV and SUVmean at the sample median. In green group B + C: Patients with MTV above the median + patients with mean SUV below the median. In red group A + C: Patients with MTV below the median + patients with mean SUV below the median. In orange group A + D: Patients with MTV below the median + patients with mean SUV above the median. In blue group B + D: Patients with MTV above the median + patients with mean SUV above the median. a) Overall survival: B + C 87 %, A + C 83 %, A + D 68 %, B + D 0 %; p < 0.003. b) Disease-free survival: B + C 90 %, A + C 83 %, A + D 50 %, B + D 25 %; p < 0.0003. c) Locoregional control: B + C 90 %, A + C 83 %, A + D 78 %, B + D 50 %; p < 0.03
Cox multivariate analysis in 38 patients with cervical cancer treated with chemo-radiotherapy
| Variable | OS | DFS | LRC | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR |
| RR |
| RR |
| |
| Three-month post-treatment partial metabolic response by [18F]FDG-PET/CT | 1:1.5 | 0.08 | 1:7.7 | <0.0001* | 1:22.6 | 0.0003* |
| Pre-treatment TGV (cutoff >562 cm3) | 1:2 | 0.03* | 1:2.75 | 0.05* | 1:3.3 | 0.07 |
OS Overall survival, DFS Disease-free survival, LRC Loco-regional control, RR Relative risk, [ F]FDG-PET 18F-labeled fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, CT Computed tomography, TGV Total glycolytic activity within the tumor volume
*p-value statistically significant