Literature DB >> 28697193

The value of 18FDG PET/CT parameters, hematological parameters and tumor markers in predicting KRAS oncogene mutation in colorectal cancer.

Ali Ozan Oner1, Evrim Surer Budak, Senay Yıldırım, Funda Aydın, Cem Sezer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In this study we investigated the predictive value of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), neutrophils/lymphocytes ratio (NLR), platelets/lymphocytes ratio (PLR), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen (CA 19-9) in the prediction of KRAS gene mutation which plays an important role in the choice of treatment in colorectal cancer patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 55 cases with untreated colorectal cancer who had undergone both PET/CT examinations for initial staging and also mutation analysis of KRAS oncogene were studied. Fluorine-18-FDG PET/CT parameters (SUVmax, MTV, TLG), hematological parameters (NLR, PLR), and tumor markers (CEA, CA 19-9) were recorded and the relationship between these parameters and KRAS oncogene mutation was evaluated using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis and multiple logistic regression analysis.
RESULTS: In 20 cases mutations in the KRAS gene were detected, while in 35 cases mutations were not observed (wild-type). ROC analysis revealed that SUVmax, MTV, TLG, NLR, PLR, and CA 19-9 could not predict mutations in KRAS oncogene (P=0.600, 0.263, 0.214, 0.057, 0.104, 0.189, respectively) although CEA value showed signi..cant difference (P=0.031) but without high value of the area under the curve (0.676). Multivariate logistic regression analysis also did not show significant association between KRAS gene mutations and SUVmax, MTV, TLG, NLR, PLR, CEA, CA 19-9 values.
CONCLUSION: We observed that in patients with colorectal cancers, we cannot predict KRAS gene mutations using PET/CT parameters (SUVmax, MTV, TLG), hematological parameters (NLR, PLR) or tumor marker CA 19-9. We detected a significant but not very strong association only between CEA and KRAS mutations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28697193     DOI: 10.1967/s002449910557

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hell J Nucl Med        ISSN: 1790-5427            Impact factor:   1.102


  6 in total

Review 1.  Radiogenomics Based on PET Imaging.

Authors:  Yong-Jin Park; Mu Heon Shin; Seung Hwan Moon
Journal:  Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2020-05-09

Review 2.  Novel imaging techniques of rectal cancer: what do radiomics and radiogenomics have to offer? A literature review.

Authors:  Natally Horvat; David D B Bates; Iva Petkovska
Journal:  Abdom Radiol (NY)       Date:  2019-11

3.  MRI Radiomics Signature as a Potential Biomarker for Predicting KRAS Status in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients.

Authors:  ZhiYuan Zhang; LiJun Shen; Yan Wang; Jiazhou Wang; Hui Zhang; Fan Xia; JueFeng Wan; Zhen Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-05-07       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 4.  The application of radiomics in predicting gene mutations in cancer.

Authors:  Yana Qi; Tingting Zhao; Mingyong Han
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  The value of haematological parameters and serum tumour markers for predicting KRAS mutations in 784 Chinese colorectal cancer patients: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Yinghao Cao; Junnan Gu; Lizhao Yan; Shenghe Deng; Fuwei Mao; Wentai Cai; Hang Li; Xinghua Liu; Jiliang Wang; Ke Wu; Kailin Cai
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 4.430

6.  Clinical Significance and Prognostic Value of the Maximum Standardized Uptake Value of 18F-Flurodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography in Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Yi-Xin Yin; Ming-Zhi Xie; Xin-Qiang Liang; Meng-Ling Ye; Ji-Lin Li; Bang-Li Hu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 6.244

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.