| Literature DB >> 30114190 |
Ulisses Ribaldo Nicolau1, Victor Hugo Fonseca de Jesus1, Eduardo Nóbrega Pereira Lima2, Marclesson Santos Alves1, Thiago Bueno de Oliveira1, Louise De Brot Andrade3, Virgilio Souza Silva1, Paula Cacciatore Bes1, Tadeu Ferreira de Paiva1, Vinicius Fernando Calsavara4, Andrea Paiva Gadelha Guimarães1, Loureno Cezana1, Paula Nicole Vieira Pinto Barbosa2, Gislaine Cristina Lopes Machado Porto2, Antônio Cássio Assis Pellizzon5, Genival Barbosa de Carvalho6, Luiz Paulo Kowalski6.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the clinical value of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) after the first cycle of induction chemotherapy (IC) in locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN). METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30114190 PMCID: PMC6095513 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200823
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Demographic and clinical characteristics of the study population.
| Characteristic | Patients (49) |
|---|---|
| 44 (90) | |
| 5 (10) | |
| 55 (39–74) | |
| 13 (27) | |
| 24 (49) | |
| 10 (20) | |
| 2 (4) | |
| 14 (29) | |
| 15 (31) | |
| 20 (41) | |
| 41 (84) | |
| 4 (8) | |
| 4 (8) | |
| 9 (18) | |
| 30 (61) | |
| 10 (20) | |
| 16 (33) | |
| 22 (45) | |
| 10 (20) | |
| 1 (2) | |
| 11 (22) | |
| 31 (63) | |
| 7 (14) | |
| 19 (46) | |
| 7 (17) | |
| 15 (37) |
Demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of the entire patient population (N = 49).
Staging followed AJCC recommendations (6th edition).
Response to induction chemotherapy according to PET/CT.
| Patient no. | Site | Clinical Staging | 18F-FDG (max SUV)–T | 18F-FDG (max SUV)—N | Response (WHO) | Response (mWHO) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Day 14 | Change (%) | Baseline | Day 14 | Change (%) | |||||
| oropharynx | IVA | 7.21 | 6.34 | -13 | 4.3 | 3.4 | -21 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 16.07 | 6.79 | -58 | 7.6 | 4.88 | -36 | no | no | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 3.32 | 2.83 | -15 | 7.3 | 4.08 | -44 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 7 | 4.3 | -39 | 4.55 | 2.22 | -51 | no | no | |
| hypopharynx | IVB | 13.7 | 6.43 | -53 | 5.56 | 5.81 | 4 | no | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 12.9 | 10.4 | -19 | 6.5 | 3.47 | -47 | yes | yes | |
| Larynx | III | 9.97 | 4.76 | -53 | 0 | 0 | 0 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | III | 6.52 | 4.91 | -25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 6.95 | 5.07 | -27 | 4.14 | 3.47 | -16 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 9.19 | 5 | -46 | 9.29 | 5.8 | -38 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | III | 12.27 | 4.9 | -60 | 6.11 | 3.1 | -49 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 14 | 5.9 | -58 | 7.5 | 0 | -100 | yes | yes | |
| hypopharynx | IVA | 10.1 | 11 | 9 | 8.4 | 8.3 | -1 | yes | yes | |
| hypopharynx | IVA | 12.8 | 5.5 | -57 | 5.2 | 3.6 | -31 | yes | yes | |
| Larynx | IVA | 6.1 | 3.7 | -39 | 10 | 4.4 | -63 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 15.2 | 4.6 | -70 | 5.9 | 3.7 | -37 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 8.9 | 9.9 | 11 | 4.9 | 9.6 | 96 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 8.8 | 1.9 | -79 | 7.2 | 1.7 | -77 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | III | 8.3 | 4.4 | -47 | 0 | 0 | 0 | yes | yes | |
| Larynx | IVA | 7.9 | 0 | -100 | 17.1 | 6.6 | -61 | no | no | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 9.8 | 8.9 | -9 | 6.9 | 4.6 | -33 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 6.9 | 6.9 | 0 | 9 | 6.8 | -24 | no | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 5.9 | 3.8 | -36 | 4.3 | 0 | -100 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 9.6 | 4.6 | -52 | 8 | 5.3 | -34 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 7 | 5.2 | -36 | 5.6 | 5.3 | -5 | no | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 2.8 | 0 | -100 | 3.3 | 4.5 | 36 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | III | 7.7 | 4.1 | -47 | 6.7 | 0 | -100 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 17.2 | 11.5 | -33 | 4.6 | 5.7 | 24 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 8.2 | 0 | -100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 6.9 | 0 | -100 | 4.3 | 4.2 | -2 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | III | 3.7 | 2.8 | -24 | 8.5 | 3 | -65 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | III | 7.3 | 4.4 | -40 | 6.2 | 2.7 | -56 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 14 | 4.5 | -68 | 14.4 | 5.9 | -59 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 5.8 | 3.9 | -33 | 2.2 | 2.9 | 32 | no | no | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 8.2 | 0 | -100 | 13.9 | 8.5 | -38.8 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 9.3 | 5 | -46.2 | 9.7 | 5 | -48.45 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | III | 6.3 | 0 | -100 | 2.8 | 3.6 | 28.57 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 6.1 | 0 | -100 | 6.3 | 2.4 | -60.65 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 13.9 | 7.7 | -44.6 | 9.5 | 5 | -47.36 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 5.3 | 0 | -100 | 5.4 | 0 | -100 | yes | yes | |
| hypopharynx | III | 13.1 | 3.2 | -75.5 | 2 | 1.6 | -20 | yes | yes | |
| Larynx | IVB | 5.3 | 3.6 | -32 | 9.8 | 7.5 | -23.4 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 9.3 | 6.3 | -32.2 | 3.3 | 6.3 | 96.8 | no | no | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 4.4 | 0 | -100 | 6.7 | 0 | -100 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVB | 4.7 | 5.2 | 10.6 | 3.7 | 2.9 | -21.6 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 4.7 | 3.2 | -31.9 | 6.5 | 4.3 | -33.8 | yes | yes | |
| oropharynx | IVA | 5.8 | 3.2 | -44.8 | 3.4 | 2.3 | -32.3 | yes | yes | |
Change in primary tumor and maximum standard uptake value (SUV) of regional lymph nodes after the first induction chemotherapy (IC), and WHO and mWHO criteria for each individual patient (after the second cycle of IC). N = 47.
Fig 1The Consort flowchart descriptions of the entire study populations.
Fig 2Two patients presenting metabolic responsive and non-responsive tumors/ neck lymph node after once IC cycle.
Pretreatment PET/CT(A) and post-treatment PET/CT(B) in patient harboring oropharyngeal tumor with complete metabolic response at 14th day, cycle 1 of induction chemotherapy (SUV variation from 5.1 to 0.0 and 5.3 to 0.0 in lymph node and primary tumor respectively). Pretreatment PET/CT(C) and post-treatment PET/CT(D) in patient harboring non-responsive oropharyngeal tumor with Increased metabolic response at 14th day, cycle 1 of induction chemotherapy (neck lymph node SUV variation from 2.8 to 3.6, despite achieving a complete metabolic response in primary tumor).
Fig 3Clinical outcome according to neck lymph node SUV change after cycle 1 of IC.
Progression-free survival (3A) and overall survival (3B) of patients who underwent D14-C1-IC 18F-FDG PET/CT according to the change in the maximum SUV of regional lymph nodes after the first cycle of IC (N = 47). Patients with tumors demonstrating no change or decrease in neck lymph node SUV (neck lymph node SUV change (%) ≤ 0) were considered responders (N = 40; red) and those with tumors showing an increase in neck uptake (Neck Lymph Node SUV Change (%) > 0) were considered non-responders (N = 7; black).
Fig 4Clinical outcome according to primary tumor SUV extent change after cycle 1 of IC.
Progression-free survival (4A) and overall survival (4B) among responsive patients (neck lymph node SUV change (%) ≤ 0) according to the change in maximum primary tumor SUV after the first cycle of IC (N = 40). Patients with maximum primary tumor SUV reduction ≥ 45% (N = 22; red) showed improved outcomes compared with those with primary tumor uptake reduction < 45% (N = 18; black).
Fig 5Clinical outcome according to primary tumor/neck lymph node SUV change after cycle 1 of IC.
Progression-free survival (5A) and overall survival (5B) among patients according to maximum regional lymph node SUV change and primary tumor SUV change after the first cycle of induction chemotherapy (N = 47). Patients with responsive tumors (neck lymph node SUV change (%) ≤ 0) and maximum primary tumor SUV reduction ≥ 45% (N = 22; red) showed improved outcomes compared with patients with responsive tumors (neck lymph node SUV change (%) ≤ 0) and primary tumor maximum SUV reduction <45% (N = 18; black), or with patients with unresponsive tumors (neck Lymph node SUV change (%) > 0; N = 7; green).