| Literature DB >> 31485803 |
Jeong Won Lee1, Myoung Won Son2, Il Kwon Chung3, Young Sin Cho3, Moon-Soo Lee4, Sang Mi Lee5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the prognostic significance of computed tomography (CT) attenuation and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake of visceral adipose tissue (VAT) to predict peritoneal recurrence-free survival (RFS) as well as RFS and overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC).Entities:
Keywords: Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; Gastric cancer; Positron emission tomography; Prognosis; Visceral adipose tissue
Year: 2019 PMID: 31485803 PMCID: PMC7031193 DOI: 10.1007/s10120-019-01001-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gastric Cancer ISSN: 1436-3291 Impact factor: 7.370
Fig. 1Measurement example of CT attenuation and SUV of VAT. A 79-year-old woman underwent FDG PET/CT for staging work-up of AGC, showing focally increased FDG uptake at lower body of the stomach on maximal intensity projection image (arrow) with SUVmaxT of 4.12 (a). On three consecutive transaxial CT images at the L4-5 spine level, the area of VAT defined as an intra-abdominal area with CT attenuation range between − 200 and − 50 HU was automatically delineated using OsiriX MD 10.0 software (b). With the areas of VAT on CT images, three-dimensional structure of VAT was automatically created and mean attenuation of the structure was calculated, which was − 90.17 (c). Afterwards, the VAT areas on CT images were exported to the corresponding fused PET/CT images. After the removal of FDG activity of the urine, bowels, and vessels, mean SUV of the areas was measured, and was found to be 0.49 (d). The patient underwent subtotal gastrectomy and was diagnosed with pT2N1 stage tubular adenocarcinoma. The patient experienced peritoneal recurrence 10.4 months after the surgery and died 13.3 months after operation
Characteristics of enrolled patients with advanced gastric cancer (n = 117)
| Characteristics | No. of patients (%) | Median (range) |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 63 (34–89) | |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 41 (35.0%) | |
| Female | 76 (65.0%) | |
| Tumor location | ||
| Upper | 9 (7.7%) | |
| Middle | 46 (39.3%) | |
| Lower | 60 (51.3%) | |
| Multiple | 2 (1.7%) | |
| Histopathology | ||
| PAC/TAC | 72 (61.6%) | |
| PDAC | 30 (25.6%) | |
| SRC/mucinous carcinoma | 15 (12.8%) | |
| Lauren classification | ||
| Intestinal | 41 (35.0%) | |
| Non-intestinal | 76 (65.0%) | |
| pT stage | ||
| T2 stage | 40 (34.2%) | |
| T3 stage | 46 (39.3%) | |
| T4 stage | 31 (26.5%) | |
| Lymph node metastasis | ||
| Absence | 37 (31.6%) | |
| Presence | 80 (68.4%) | |
| TNM stage | ||
| Stage I | 23 (19.7%) | |
| Stage II | 44 (37.6%) | |
| Stage III | 50 (42.7%) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | 4.9 (1.5–17.0) | |
| Adjuvant treatment | ||
| Yes | 78 (66.7%) | |
| No | 39 (33.3%) | |
| Serum CRP (mg/dL) | 2.02 (0.01–78.02) | |
| NLR | 2.20 (0.71–8.60) | |
| PLR | 141.97 (2.93–425.43) | |
| SUVmaxT | 4.85 (2.19–24.60) | |
| VAT attenuation | − 92.38 (− 108.42 to − 73.17) | |
| VAT SUV | 0.45 (0.22–0.90) |
PAC papillary adenocarcinoma, TAC tubular adenocarcinoma, PDAC poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, SRC signet-ring cell carcinoma, CRP C-reactive protein, NLR neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, PLR platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, SUVmaxT maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor, VAT visceral adipose tissue, SUV standardized uptake value
Results of correlation analyses
| VAT attenuation | VAT SUV | |
|---|---|---|
| T stage | ||
| T2 | − 94.93 ± 7.64 | 0.44 ± 0.14 |
| T3 | − 93.96 ± 7.85 | 0.46 ± 0.12 |
| T4 | − 87.28 ± 9.14 | 0.57 ± 0.18 |
| | < 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Lymph node metastasis | ||
| Absence | − 93.98 ± 7.80 | 0.44 ± 0.13 |
| Presence | − 91.89 ± 9.03 | 0.50 ± 0.16 |
| | 0.221 | 0.034 |
| TNM stage | ||
| Stage I | − 95.80 ± 8.27 | 0.42 ± 0.14 |
| Stage II | − 96.43 ± 6.87 | 0.42 ± 0.11 |
| Stage III | − 88.10 ± 8.38 | 0.56 ± 0.16 |
| | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
| Tumor size | ||
| | 0.205 | 0.228 |
| | 0.027 | 0.013 |
| SUVmaxT | ||
| | 0.158 | 0.197 |
| | 0.068 | 0.033 |
| Histopathology | ||
| PAC/TAC | − 92.40 ± 8.91 | 0.47 ± 0.15 |
| PDAC/SRC/mucinous carcinoma | − 92.72 ± 8.39 | 0.50 ± 0.16 |
| | 0.846 | 0.402 |
| Lauren classification | ||
| Intestinal | − 93.18 ± 8.97 | 0.49 ± .15 |
| Non-intestinal | − 92.16 ± 8.56 | 0.48 ± 0.15 |
| | 0.547 | 0.793 |
| Serum CRP | ||
| | 0.012 | 0.080 |
| | 0.898 | 0.391 |
| NLR | ||
| | 0.122 | 0.164 |
| | 0.192 | 0.077 |
| PLR | ||
| | 0.305 | 0.318 |
| | 0.008 | 0.005 |
SUVmaxT maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor, PAC papillary adenocarcinoma, TAC tubular adenocarcinoma, PDAC poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, SRC signet-ring cell carcinoma, CRP C-reactive protein, NLR neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, PLR platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, r Pearson’s correlation coefficient, VAT visceral adipose tissue, SUV standardized uptake value
Univariate analyses for RFS, peritoneal RFS, and OS
| Variables | RFS | Peritoneal RFS | OS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | ||||
| Age (≤ 60 vs. > 60) | 0.563 | 1.20 (0.65–2.22) | 0.971 | 1.02 (0.42–2.45) | 0.507 | 1.33 (0.57–3.07) |
| Sex (female vs. male) | 0.402 | 1.31 (0.70–2.47) | 0.139 | 1.95 (0.80–4.74) | 0.741 | 1.16 (0.49–2.73) |
| Histopathology (PAC/TAC vs. PDAC/SRC/mucinous carcinoma) | 0.323 | 1.36 (0.74–2.49) | 0.045 | 2.50 (1.02–6.11) | 0.940 | 1.03 (0.45–2.39) |
| Lauren classification (intestinal vs. non-intestinal) | 0.490 | 1.26 (0.65–2.42) | 0.268 | 1.77 (0.64–4.88) | 0.306 | 1.63 (0.64–4.13) |
| T stage | ||||||
| T2 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| T3 | 0.010 | 4.17 (1.40–12.39) | 0.043 | 8.47 (1.07–66.87) | 0.103 | 3.63 (0.77–17.09) |
| T4 | < 0.001 | 10.27 (3.51–30.04) | 0.006 | 18.16 (2.32–142.30) | 0.002 | 10.64 (2.40–47.23) |
| Lymph node metastasis (absence vs. presence) | < 0.001 | 6.38 (2.27–17.93) | 0.021 | 5.61 (1.30–24.28) | 0.017 | 5.87 (1.37–25.08) |
| Tumor size (≤ 5.0 vs. > 5.0) | 0.007 | 3.10 (1.61–5.97) | 0.007 | 4.03 (1.46–11.21) | 0.003 | 4.49 (1.66–12.10) |
| Serum CRP (≤ 5.00 vs. > 5.00) | 0.223 | 1.49 (0.78–2.83) | 0.170 | 1.87 (0.76–4.58) | 0.167 | 1.81 (0.78–4.17) |
| NLR (≤ 2.30 vs. > 2.30) | 0.002 | 2.70 (1.44–5.05) | 0.008 | 3.66 (1.40–9.55) | 0.008 | 3.32 (1.36–8.08) |
| PLR (≤ 173.76 vs. > 173.76) | 0.002 | 2.68 (1.46–4.93) | 0.072 | 2.25 (0.93–5.46) | 0.005 | 3.28 (1.44–7.50) |
| SUVmaxT (≤ 4.65 vs. > 4.65) | 0.004 | 2.61 (1.35–5.04) | 0.052 | 2.60 (0.99–6.79) | 0.002 | 6.85 (2.03–23.12) |
| VAT attenuation (≤ − 90.60 vs. > − 90.60) | 0.008 | 2.28 (1.24–4.20) | 0.019 | 2.72 (1.11–6.66) | < 0.001 | 6.33 (2.35–17.07) |
| VAT SUV (≤ 0.46 vs. > 0.46) | 0.040 | 1.88 (1.03–3.49) | 0.017 | 2.99 (1.15–7.78) | < 0.001 | 12.84 (3.01–54.80) |
RFS recurrence-free survival, OS overall survival, PAC papillary adenocarcinoma, TAC tubular adenocarcinoma, PDAC poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, SRC signet-ring cell carcinoma, CRP C-reactive protein, NLR neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, PLR platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, SUVmaxT maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor, VAT visceral adipose tissue, SUV standardized uptake value, CI confidence interval
Fig. 2Kaplan-Meier RFS (a), peritoneal RFS (b), and OS (c) curves according to CT attenuation of VAT
Fig. 3Kaplan-Meier RFS (a), peritoneal RFS (b), and OS (c) curves according to FDG uptake of VAT
Multivariate analyses for RFS, peritoneal RFS, and OS
| Variables | RFS | Peritoneal RFS | OS | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model with attenuation | Model with SUV | Model with attenuation | Model with SUV | Model with attenuation | Model with SUV | |||||||
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | |||||||
| Histopathology | – | – | – | – | 0.008 | 3.00 (1.25–7.46) | 0.010 | 3.19 (1.21–8.45) | – | – | – | – |
| T stage | ||||||||||||
| T2 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||||
| T3 | 0.035 | 3.29 (1.09–9.34) | 0.037 | 3.25 (1.08–9.80) | 0.135 | 4.98 (0.61–40.78) | 0.063 | 7.16 (0.90–57.09) | 0.158 | 5.27 (0.65–14.49) | 0.312 | 2.29 (0.46–11.30) |
| T4 | 0.005 | 5.08 (1.66–15.57) | 0.003 | 5.32 (1.73–16.14) | 0.025 | 10.90 (1.35–88.16) | 0.026 | 10.88 (1.32–89.38) | 0.006 | 5.27 (1.24–24.32) | 0.010 | 3.36 (1.15–17.20) |
| Lymph node metastasis | 0.038 | 3.20 (1.07–9.59) | 0.030 | 3.35 (1.12–10.02) | 0.159 | 3.06 (0.65–14.52) | 0.200 | 2.83 (0.58–13.84) | 0.527 | 1.66 (0.35–7.99) | 0.511 | 1.70 (0.35–8.30) |
| Tumor size | 0.295 | 1.46 (0.72–2.99) | 0.167 | 1.62 (0.82–3.23) | 0.033 | 3.25 (1.10–9.63) | 0.049 | 3.05 (3.05–9.27) | 0.452 | 1.54 (0.50–4.78) | 0.311 | 1.82 (0.57–5.78) |
| NLR | 0.053 | 1.93 (0.99–3.79) | 0.015 | 2.21 (1.16–4.19) | 0.063 | 2.68 (0.95–7.57) | 0.101 | 2.28 (0.85–6.09) | 0.251 | 1.72 (0.68–4.32) | 0.175 | 1.89 (0.75–4.77) |
| SUVmaxT | 0.015 | 2.21 (1.16–4.19) | 0.039 | 2.01 (1.04–3.89) | – | – | – | – | 0.012 | 4.28 (1.24–14.81) | 0.139 | 2.66 (0.73–9.74) |
| VAT attenuation | 0.477 | 1.28 (0.65–2.53) | – | – | 0.008 | 3.86 (1.47–1.12) | – | – | 0.007 | 3.83 (1.36–10.87) | – | – |
| VAT SUV | – | – | 0.530 | 1.23 (0.64–2.36) | – | – | 0.019 | 2.99 (1.20–7.48) | – | – | 0.004 | 8.45 (1.97–37.02) |
Statistically significant for variables with p < 0.0083 after Bonferroni adjustment
RFS recurrence-free survival, OS overall survival, NLR neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, PLR platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, SUVmaxT maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor, VAT visceral adipose tissue, SUV standardized uptake value, CI confidence interval