| Literature DB >> 29245926 |
Chin-Chuan Chang1,2, Shih-Feng Cho3, Ya-Wen Chuang1, Chia-Yang Lin1, Shu-Min Chang1, Wen-Ling Hsu1, Ying-Fong Huang1,4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the prognostic significance of metabolic parameters on pre-treatment 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/ computed tomography (FDG PET/CT), in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) receiving rituximab-containing therapy.Entities:
Keywords: FDG PET/CT; MTV; TLG; diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; prognosis
Year: 2017 PMID: 29245926 PMCID: PMC5725117 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.20447
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Baseline characteristics at diagnosis of the 118 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma
| Variable | Value (%) |
|---|---|
| Age (y) | |
| Mean ± SD | 61.8 ± 16.9 |
| Range | 15-94 |
| Sex | |
| Male | 63 (53.4) |
| Female | 55 (46.6) |
| Ann Arbor stage | |
| I | 16 (13.6) |
| II | 32 (27.1) |
| III | 29 (24.6) |
| IV | 41 (34.7) |
| IPI | |
| Low risk (score 0-1) | 39 (33.1) |
| Low-intermediate (score 2) | 36 (30.5) |
| High-intermediate (score 3) | 21 (17.8) |
| High (score 4-5) | 22 (18.6) |
| Revised IPI | |
| Very good (score 0) | 11 (9.3) |
| Good (score 1-2) | 64 (54.2) |
| Poor (score 3-5) | 43 (36.4) |
| Primary lesions | |
| Lymph nodes | 47 (39.8) |
| Extranodal lesions | 71 (60.2) |
| Bone marrow involvement | |
| Yes | 20 (16.9) |
| No | 98 (83.1) |
IPI: international prognostic index.
Baseline laboratory and imaging parameters of the 118 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma
| Variable | Mean (SD) |
|---|---|
| Hb (g/dL) | 11.7 (1.9) |
| WBC (x 103 μL) | 6.9 (3.0) |
| Platelet (x 103 /μL) | 231.4 (103.2) |
| Albumin (g/dL) | 3.6 (0.6) |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.9 (0.7) |
| GOT (IU/L) | 33.7 (24.0) |
| GPT (IU/L) | 26.0 (17.2) |
| LDH (IU/L) | 360.0 (503.0) |
| β2-microglobulin (μg/dL) | 317.9 (287.2) |
| Maximal SUVt | 15.8 (8.2) |
| MTV (cm3) | 550.4 (678.3) |
| TLG (cm3) | 3533.2 (4394.1) |
SD: standard deviation; Hb: hemoglobin; WBC: white blood cell; GOT: glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase; GPT: glutamate pyruvate transaminase; LDH: lactate dehydrogenase; SUVt: standardized uptake value of tumor; MTV: metabolic tumor volume; TLG: total lesion glycolysis.
Correlations between metabolic parameters from FDG PET/CT scans and clinical prognostic parameters
| Total MTV | TLG | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hb | -0.275 | 0.0026* | -0.237 | 0.0097* |
| WBC | 0.087 | 0.3482 | 0.089 | 0.3401 |
| Platelet | 0.065 | 0.4836 | 0.089 | 0.3368 |
| Albumin | -0.488 | <0.0001* | -0.453 | <0.0001* |
| LDH | 0.624 | <0.0001* | 0.577 | <0.0001* |
| Creatinine | 0.182 | 0.0484* | 0.152 | 0.1003 |
| GOT | 0.369 | <0.0001* | 0.330 | 0.0003* |
| GPT | 0.040 | 0.6691 | 0.025 | 0.7897 |
| β2-microglobilin | 0.491 | <0.0001* | 0.424 | <0.0001* |
| Clinical Stage | 0.467 | <0.0001* | 0.435 | <0.0001* |
| IPI score | 0.551 | <0.0001* | 0.475 | <0.0001* |
| Revised IPI | 0.557 | <0.0001* | 0.491 | <0.0001* |
| Maximal SUVt | 0.368 | <0.0001* | 0.533 | <0.0001* |
| Total MTV | - | - | 0.969 | <0.0001* |
| TLG | 0.969 | <0.0001* | - | - |
* statistically significant
MTV: metabolic tumor volume; TLG: total lesion glycolysis; r: correlation coefficients; Hb: hemoglolin; WBC: white blood cell; LDH: lactate dehydrogenase; GOT: glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase; GPT: glutamate pyruvate transaminase; SUVt: standardized uptake value of tumor; IPI: international prognostic index.
Comparisons between mean values of metabolic parameters measured in patients with different clinical outcomes
| Progression | Remission | Expired | Alive | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (n = 55) | (n = 63) | (n = 49) | (n = 69) | ||||
| Maximal SUVt | Mean | 16.6 | 15.1 | 0.3288 | 16.0 | 15.7 | 0.7806 |
| SD | 8.0 | 8.2 | 7.7 | 8.5 | |||
| Total MTV | Mean | 745.1 | 380.5 | 0.0005* | 828.1 | 353.2 | <0.0001* |
| SD | 785.0 | 518.4 | 795.4 | 500.2 | |||
| TLG | Mean | 4655.4 | 2553.6 | 0.0021* | 5003.4 | 2489.2 | 0.0004* |
| SD | 5033.3 | 3504.1 | 4913.6 | 3676.4 |
* statistically significant
SUVt: standardized uptake value of tumor; MTV: metabolic tumor volume; TLG: total lesion glycolysis; SD: standard deviation.
Figure 1ROC curve analysis to determine the most discriminative cut-off value of total MTV and TLG
(A) For prediction of PFS, AUCs were 0.687 for MTV (p = 0.0001) and 0.665 for TLG (p = 0.001). (B) For prediction of OS, AUCs were 0.723 for MTV (p < 0.0001) and 0.691 for TLG (p = 0.0001) respectively.
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier analysis for evaluating the PFS and OS based on total MTV and TLG with different cut-off values
Patients with higher total MTV had significantly shorter survival, compared to patients with lower total MTV (PFS, p = 0.0001; OS, p < 0.0001; Figure 2A and 2B). Patients with higher TLG also had significantly poorer outcome compared to patients with lower TLG (PFS, p = 0.0008; OS, p = 0.0002; Figure 2C and 2D).
Cox proportional hazards models analysis of potential prognostic factors affecting PFS
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||
| Sex (male vs. female) | 1.22 (0.72-2.10) | 0.4509 | ||
| Age (≥ vs.< 65 years) | 1.44 (0.85-2.46) | 0.1735 | ||
| Hemoglobin (< vs. ≥ 12.3 g/dL) | 1.75 (0.98-3.10) | 0.0501 | ||
| WBC (< vs. ≥ 4400 /μL) | 1.31 (0.66-2.60) | 0.4559 | ||
| Platelet (< vs. ≥ 172 × 103/μL) | 2.12 (1.24-3.65) | 0.0084* | ||
| Albumin (< vs. ≥ 3.5 g/dL) | 1.87 (1.10-3.18) | 0.0236* | ||
| LDH (≥ vs. < 192 IU/L) | 2.65 (1.48-4.77) | 0.0006* | ||
| Creatinine (≥ vs. < 1.3 mg/dL) | 1.84 (0.93-3.65) | 0.1037 | ||
| GOT (≥ vs.< 42 IU/L) | 1.75 (0.98-3.14) | 0.0703 | ||
| GPT(≥ vs.< 40 IU/L) | 1.52 (0.80-2.89) | 0.2210 | ||
| β2-microglobulin (≥ vs. < 340 μg/dL) | 1.66 (0.92-2.99) | 0.1042 | ||
| Maximal SUVt (≥ vs. < 18.8) | 1.32 (0.77-2.24) | 0.3154 | ||
| MTV (≥ vs. < 165.4 cm3) | 3.32 (1.78-6.20) | <0.0001* | 2.31 (1.16-4.60) | 0.0180* |
| TLG (≥ vs. < 1204.9 cm3) | 2.57 (1.43-4.61) | 0.0009* | ||
| BM invovlement (yes vs. no) | 1.94 (1.05-3.57) | 0.0451* | ||
| Stage | ||||
| I | 1 | 0.0007* | ||
| II | 1.60 (0.43-5.93) | 0.4785 | ||
| III | 4.15 (1.21-14.28) | 0.0238* | ||
| IV | 4.99 (1.51-16.48) | 0.0083* | ||
| IPI | ||||
| Low (0-1) | 1 | 0.0001* | 0.0070* | |
| Low-intermediate (2) | 1.26 (0.57-2.75) | 0.5697 | 0.98 (0.44-2.19) | 0.9530 |
| High-intermediate (3) | 2.86 (1.30-6.31) | 0.0087* | 1.85 (0.79-4.30) | 0.1550 |
| High (4-5) | 5.06 (2.40-10.68) | <0.0001* | 3.20 (1.42-7.18) | 0.0050* |
| Revised IPI | ||||
| 1 | 1 | <0.0001* | ||
| 2 | 1.43 (0.43-4.77) | 0.5641 | ||
| 3 | 4.60 (1.40-15.18) | 0.0121* | ||
* statistically significant
HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; WBC: white blood cell; LDH: lactate dehydrogenase; GOT: glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase; GPT: glutamate pyruvate transaminase; SUVt: standardized uptake value of tumor; MTV: metabolic tumor volume; TLG: total lesion glycolysis; BM: bone marrow; IPI: international prognostic index
Cox proportional hazards models analysis of potential prognostic factors affecting OS
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||
| Sex (male vs. female) | 1.03 (0.59-1.82) | 0.9058 | ||
| Age (≥ vs.< 65 years) | 2.35 (1.32-4.19) | 0.0032* | 1.89 (1.03-3.48) | 0.0410* |
| Hemoglobin (< vs. ≥ 12.3 g/dL) | 2.83 (1.44-5.55) | 0.0010* | ||
| WBC (< vs. ≥ 4400 /μL) | 1.36 (0.66-2.81) | 0.4179 | ||
| Platelet (< vs. ≥ 172 × 103/μL) | 2.12 (1.20-3.75) | 0.0126* | ||
| Albumin (< vs. ≥ 3.5 g/dL) | 2.56 (1.46-4.49) | 0.0012* | ||
| LDH (≥ vs. < 192 IU/L) | 3.30 (1.72-6.35) | 0.0001* | ||
| Creatinine (≥ vs. < 1.3 mg/dL) | 2.12 (1.06-4.25) | 0.0499* | ||
| GOT (≥ vs.< 42 IU/L) | 2.23 (1.23-4.02) | 0.0114* | ||
| GPT(≥ vs.< 40 IU/L) | 1.60 (0.81-3.13) | 0.1933 | ||
| β2-microglobulin (≥ vs. < 340 μg/dL) | 2.28 (1.26-4.12) | 0.0097* | ||
| Maximal SUVt (≥ vs. < 18.8) | 1.22 (0.69-2.14) | 0.5022 | ||
| MTV (≥ vs. < 190.2 cm3) | 4.05 (2.07-7.95) | <0.0001* | 2.38 (1.12-5.04) | 0.0240* |
| TLG (≥ vs. < 1480.8 cm3) | 2.96 (1.61-5.45) | 0.0003* | ||
| BM invovlement (yes vs. no) | 1.33 (0.66-2.69) | 0.4332 | ||
| Stage | ||||
| I | 1 | 0.0007* | ||
| II | 1.01 (0.25-4.04) | 0.9889 | ||
| III | 4.00 (1.17-13.67) | 0.0270* | ||
| IV | 3.84 (1.15-12.81) | 0.0285* | ||
| IPI | ||||
| Low (0-1) | 1 | <0.0001* | 0.0030* | |
| Low-intermediate (2) | 3.14 (1.12-8.81) | 0.0301* | 2.21 (0.76-6.45) | 0.1440 |
| High-intermediate (3) | 6.23 (2.19-17.73) | 0.0006* | 3.61 (1.18-11.02) | 0.0240* |
| High (4-5) | 14.2 (5.27-38.36) | <0.0001* | 6.64 (2.17-20.32) | 0.0010* |
| Revised IPI | ||||
| 1 | 1 | <0.0001* | ||
| 2 | 3.36 (0.45-25.27) | 0.2391 | ||
| 3 | 14.3 (1.94-104.7) | 0.0090* | ||
* statistically significant
HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; WBC: white blood cell; LDH: lactate dehydrogenase; GOT: glutamate oxaloacetate transaminase; GPT: glutamate pyruvate transaminase; SUVt: standardized uptake value of tumor; MTV: metabolic tumor volume; TLG: total lesion glycolysis; BM: bone marrow; IPI: international prognostic index
Studies on the prognostic values of MTV and TLG in DLBCL
| Study | Patient numbers | Treatment | MTV (cm3) | TLG (cm3) | Prognostic significance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median | range | Median | range | ||||
| Adams et al [ | 73 | R-CHOP | 445 | 6-2454 | 4898 | 13-23322 | Neither MTV nor TLG predicted outcome. |
| Esfahani et al [ | 20 | R-CHOP | NA | NA | NA | NA | TLG 705 cm3 yielded PFS 56.5 vs. 29.2 months. |
| Kim et al [ | 140 | R-CHOP | NA | NA | 416 | 5-1499 | TLG 416 cm3 yielded 2-year PFS 92% vs.73%. |
| Sasanelli et al [ | 114 | R-CHOP or ASCT | 315 | 4-2654 | 2974 | 14-21908 | MTV 550 cm3 yielded 3-year OS 87% vs. 60%. |
| Zhou et al [ | 91 | R-CHOP | 51 | IQR: 17-151 | 497 | IQR: 104-1452 | TLG 827 cm3 yielded 5-year PFS 83% vs. 34%; 726 cm3 yielded 5-year OS 92% vs. 67%. |
| Gallicchio et al [ | 52* | R-CHOP or R-COMP | 43 | 2-340 | 597 | 110-2552 | SUVmax rather than MTV and TLG remained the only predictor for EFS. |
| Mikhaeel et al [ | 147 | R-CHOP | 595 | 2-7357 | 4670 | 6-36570 | MTV combined i-PET Deauville score had most predictive power. |
| Song et al [ | 169+ | R-CHOP | 198 | 5-1991 | NA | NA | MTV 220 cm3 yielded 5-year PFS 90% vs. 56%; 5-year OS 93% vs. 58%. |
| Song et al [ | 107# | R-CHOP | 527 | 15-3549 | NA | NA | Total MTV 601 cm3 yielded significance difference in both PFS and OS. |
| Song et al [ | 165※ | R-CHOP or Surgery + R-CHOP | 133 | 10-654 | NA | NA | High IPI, High MTV, and surgical resection followed by R-CHOP were independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS. |
| Cottereau et al [ | 81 | R-CHOP R-ACVBP | 320 | IQR: 106-668 | 3677 | IQR: 1066-6096 | MTV 300 cm3 yielded 5-year PFS 76% vs. 43%; 5-year OS 78% vs. 46%. |
| The current study | 118 | R-CHOP | 249 | 2-2970 | 1531 | 3-18106 | MTV 165 cm3 yielded 5-year PFS 66% vs. 32%; 190 cm3 yielded 5-year OS 70% vs. 34%. |
Abbreviations:
MTV: metabolic tumor volume; TLG: total lesion glycolysis; R-CHOP: rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone; NA: not available; PFS: progression-free survival; ASCT: autologous stem cell transplantation; OS: overall survival; IQR: interquartile range; R-COMP: rituximab, cyclophosphamide, hydroxydaunorubicin liposomal, vincristine, prednisone; SUVmax: maximal standardized uptake value; EFS: event-free survival; i-PET: interim positron emission tomography; IPI: international prognostic index; R-ACVBP: rituximab, doxorubicine, vindesine, cyclophosphamide, bleomycin, prednisolone.
* In patients with intermediate IPI score
+ In staged II and III patients without extranodal site involvement
# In patients with bone marrow involvement of lymphoma
※ In patients with stage IE or IIE primary gastrointestinal DLBCL