Jeong Eun Kim1, Sun Young Chae2, Jwa Hoon Kim1, Hwa Jung Kim3, Tae Won Kim1, Kyu-Pyo Kim1, Sun Young Kim1, Jae-Lyun Lee1, Seung Jun Oh2, Jae Seung Kim2, Jin-Sook Ryu2, Dae Hyuk Moon2, Yong Sang Hong4. 1. Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Preventive Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Republic of Korea. yshong@amc.seoul.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the value of 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine (18F-FLT) and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for early prediction of standard anatomic response and survival outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving Regorafenib. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with mCRC refractory to standard cytotoxic chemotherapy were enrolled and received Regorafenib (160 mg/day on days 1-21, following a 7-day break). Standard anatomical response was evaluated every 8 weeks. Both scans were performed before and on day 21 of Regorafenib. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients included in per-protocol analysis, complete response was not observed, but partial response was observed in 8.2% (n = 5), stable disease in 67.2% (n = 41), and progressive disease in 24.6% (n = 15). The objective response rate was 8.2% and disease control rate 75.4%. Five responders (8.2%) and 13 non-responders (21.3%) met the CT and 18F-FLT PET/CT criteria (maximum standardized uptake value decrease ≥ 10.6% for responders). Forty-three (70.5%) exhibited discordant responses on CT and 18F-FLT PET/CT (McNemar test, P < 0.001). At a median follow-up of 8.9 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 3.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.34-3.80 months) and 8.5 months (95% CI, 6.95-10.10 months), respectively. Comparison of PFS and OS according to 18F-FLT PET/CT response revealed slightly longer PFS (P = 0.015) in responders, but the correlation with OS was not significant. The PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumours (PERCIST) of 18F-FDG PET/CT revealed differences in PFS and OS between partial metabolic response (PMR) and non-PMR (P = 0.048 and P = 0.014, respectively), and between progressive metabolic disease (PMD) and non-PMD (P = 0.189 and P = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcome was significantly associated with PERCIST using 18F-FDG PET/CT but the change of 18F-FLT uptake was only slightly associated with PFS. 18F-FDG PET/CT can be used as imaging biomarker to predict clinical outcomes early in patients with mCRC receiving Regorafenib.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the value of 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine (18F-FLT) and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for early prediction of standard anatomic response and survival outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receiving Regorafenib. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with mCRC refractory to standard cytotoxic chemotherapy were enrolled and received Regorafenib (160 mg/day on days 1-21, following a 7-day break). Standard anatomical response was evaluated every 8 weeks. Both scans were performed before and on day 21 of Regorafenib. RESULTS: Of the 61 patients included in per-protocol analysis, complete response was not observed, but partial response was observed in 8.2% (n = 5), stable disease in 67.2% (n = 41), and progressive disease in 24.6% (n = 15). The objective response rate was 8.2% and disease control rate 75.4%. Five responders (8.2%) and 13 non-responders (21.3%) met the CT and 18F-FLT PET/CT criteria (maximum standardized uptake value decrease ≥ 10.6% for responders). Forty-three (70.5%) exhibited discordant responses on CT and 18F-FLT PET/CT (McNemar test, P < 0.001). At a median follow-up of 8.9 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 3.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.34-3.80 months) and 8.5 months (95% CI, 6.95-10.10 months), respectively. Comparison of PFS and OS according to 18F-FLT PET/CT response revealed slightly longer PFS (P = 0.015) in responders, but the correlation with OS was not significant. The PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumours (PERCIST) of 18F-FDG PET/CT revealed differences in PFS and OS between partial metabolic response (PMR) and non-PMR (P = 0.048 and P = 0.014, respectively), and between progressive metabolic disease (PMD) and non-PMD (P = 0.189 and P = 0.007, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Survival outcome was significantly associated with PERCIST using 18F-FDG PET/CT but the change of 18F-FLT uptake was only slightly associated with PFS. 18F-FDG PET/CT can be used as imaging biomarker to predict clinical outcomes early in patients with mCRC receiving Regorafenib.
Authors: Ken Herrmann; Hinrich A Wieder; Andreas K Buck; Marion Schöffel; Bernd-Joachim Krause; Falko Fend; Tibor Schuster; Christian Meyer zum Büschenfelde; Hans-Jürgen Wester; Justus Duyster; Christian Peschel; Markus Schwaiger; Tobias Dechow Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-06-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Su Jin Kim; Jae Sung Lee; Ki Chum Im; Seog-Young Kim; Soo-Ah Park; Seung Jin Lee; Seung Jun Oh; Dong Soo Lee; Dae Hyuk Moon Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2008-11-07 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Leonard B Saltz; Stephen Clarke; Eduardo Díaz-Rubio; Werner Scheithauer; Arie Figer; Ralph Wong; Sheryl Koski; Mikhail Lichinitser; Tsai-Shen Yang; Fernando Rivera; Felix Couture; Florin Sirzén; Jim Cassidy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Herbert Hurwitz; Louis Fehrenbacher; William Novotny; Thomas Cartwright; John Hainsworth; William Heim; Jordan Berlin; Ari Baron; Susan Griffing; Eric Holmgren; Napoleone Ferrara; Gwen Fyfe; Beth Rogers; Robert Ross; Fairooz Kabbinavar Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: L F de Geus-Oei; H W M van Laarhoven; E P Visser; R Hermsen; B A van Hoorn; Y J L Kamm; P F M Krabbe; F H M Corstens; C J A Punt; W J G Oyen Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Wei Chen; Sibylle Delaloye; Daniel H S Silverman; Cheri Geist; Johannes Czernin; James Sayre; Nagichettiar Satyamurthy; Whitney Pope; Albert Lai; Michael E Phelps; Timothy Cloughesy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-10-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christos S Karapetis; Shirin Khambata-Ford; Derek J Jonker; Chris J O'Callaghan; Dongsheng Tu; Niall C Tebbutt; R John Simes; Haji Chalchal; Jeremy D Shapiro; Sonia Robitaille; Timothy J Price; Lois Shepherd; Heather-Jane Au; Christiane Langer; Malcolm J Moore; John R Zalcberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-10-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hee-Jung Sohn; You-Jung Yang; Jin-Sook Ryu; Seung Jun Oh; Ki Chun Im; Dae Hyuk Moon; Dae Ho Lee; Cheolwon Suh; Jung-Shin Lee; Sang-We Kim Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-11-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Anna G Sorace; Asser A Elkassem; Samuel J Galgano; Suzanne E Lapi; Benjamin M Larimer; Savannah C Partridge; C Chad Quarles; Kirsten Reeves; Tiara S Napier; Patrick N Song; Thomas E Yankeelov; Stefanie Woodard; Andrew D Smith Journal: Semin Nucl Med Date: 2020-06-10 Impact factor: 4.446
Authors: Madhusudan A Savaikar; Timothy Whitehead; Sudipta Roy; Lori Strong; Nicole Fettig; Tina Prmeau; Jingqin Luo; Shunqiang Li; Richard L Wahl; Kooresh I Shoghi Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-11-22 Impact factor: 10.057