| Literature DB >> 31769415 |
Domenico Albano1, Riccardo Laudicella2, Paola Ferro3, Michela Allocca4, Elisabetta Abenavoli4, Ambra Buschiazzo5, Alessia Castellino6, Agostino Chiaravalloti7,8, Annarosa Cuccaro9, Lea Cuppari10, Rexhep Durmo1, Laura Evangelista11, Viviana Frantellizzi12, Sofya Kovalchuk13, Flavia Linguanti4, Giulia Santo14, Matteo Bauckneht15, Salvatore Annunziata16.
Abstract
Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive lymphoma subtype with poor prognosis in which 18F-FDG-PET/CT role in treatment response evaluation and prediction of outcome is still unclear. The aim of this multicentric study was to investigate the role of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in staging MCL and the prognostic role of Deauville criteria (DC) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We retrospectively enrolled 229 patients who underwent baseline and end-of-treatment (eot) 18F-FDG-PET/CT after first-line therapy. EotPET/CT scans were visually interpreted according to DC. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of PET/CT for evaluation of bone marrow (BM) were 27%, 100%, 100%, 48% and 57%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of PET/CT for evaluation of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract were 60%, 99%, 93%, 90% and 91%, respectively. At a median follow-up of 40 months, relapse occurred in 104 cases and death in 49. EotPET/CT results using DC significantly correlated with PFS, not with OS. Instead, considering OS, only MIPI score was significantly correlated. In conclusion, we demonstrated that MCL is an FDG-avid lymphoma and 18F-FDG-PET/CT is a useful tool for staging purpose, showing good specificity for BM and GI evaluation, but suboptimal sensitivity. EotPET/CT result was the only independent significant prognostic factor that correlated with PFS.Entities:
Keywords: 18F-FDG PET/CT; Deauville criteria; mantle cell lymphoma; prognosis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31769415 PMCID: PMC6966583 DOI: 10.3390/cancers11121831
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Baseline features of our population.
| Variables | Patients | Average (Range) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 65.1 (29–88) | ||
| Sex | |||
| male | 172 (75%) | ||
| female | 57 (25%) | ||
| Tumor stage at diagnosis (Ann Arbor) | |||
| I | 4 (2%) | ||
| II | 9 (4%) | ||
| III | 32 (14%) | ||
| IV | 184 (80%) | ||
| Blastoid variant | 26 (11%) | ||
| B symptoms | 65 (28%) | ||
| LDH | |||
| ≤245 U/L | 121 (57%) | ||
| >245 U/L | 93 (43%) | ||
| β2-microglobulin | |||
| ≤2.8 mg/L | 108 (62%) | ||
| >2.8 mg/L | 65 (38%) | ||
| MIPI score | |||
| low-intermediate (≤6) | 99 (43%) | ||
| high-intermediate (>6) | 130 (57%) | ||
| Bulky disease | 40 (17%) | ||
| Splenomegaly | 101 (44%) | ||
| Ki-67 score | |||
| ≤15% | 65 (36%) | ||
| >15% | 118 (64%) | ||
LDH: lactate dehydrogenase; MIPI: mantle cell lymphoma international prognostic index.
Agreement between 18F-FDG PET/CT and BM biopsy and GI endoscopy findings.
| PET/CT Findings | BM Biopsy | GI Endoscopy | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive | Negative | Positive | Negative | |
| Positive | 37 (16%) | 0 (0%) | 28 (12%) | 2 (1%) |
| Negative | 99 (43%) | 93 (41%) | 19 (8%) | 180 (79%) |
| Total | 136 (59%) | 93 (41%) | 47 (21%) | 182 (79%) |
BM: bone marrow; GI: gastrointestinal.
Figure 1Emblematic example of complete metabolic response. A representative case of a 56-year-old male with stage III MCL. (a) Baseline maximum intensity projection (MIP), showing diffuse hypermetabolic disease in (b) laterocervical, (c) mediastinal and (d) iliac nodes. (e) PET/CT after chemotherapy showing a complete metabolic response (Deauville score 1) with no 18F-FDG uptake (f–h) with the disappearance of previous lesions.
Figure 2Emblematic example of progressive disease. A representative case of a 65-year-old male with stage III MCL. (a) Baseline maximum intensity projection (MIP, showing diffuse hypermetabolic disease in (b) laterocervical, axillary, (c) iliac and (d) inguinal nodes and in spleen. (e) PET/CT after chemotherapy showing a metabolic progression of disease (Deauville score 5) with the appearance of new lesions (f–h).
Figure 3Progression-free survival (PFS) curves according to end-of-treatment PET/CT results using (A) Deauville criteria and (B) MIPI score.
Figure 4Progression-free survival curve combining MIPI score and Deauville score groups.
Figure 5Overall survival (OS) curves according to end-of-treatment PET/CT results using (A) Deauville criteria and (B) MIPI score.
Univariate and multivariate analyses for PFS and OS.
| Variables | Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||
| PFS | ||||
| Sex | 0.451 | 0.845 (0.548–1.306) | ||
| Age | 0.153 | 1.530 (0.838–3.097) | ||
| MIPI score | 0.009 | 0.713 (0.482–1.056) | 0.174 | 1.219 (0.915–1.623) |
| LDH level | 0.163 | 0.742 (0.488–1.128) | ||
| Β2 microglobulin | 0.458 | 0.831 (0.511–1.353) | ||
| Ki-67 score | 0.066 | 0.653 (0.415–1.028) | ||
| Bulky disease | 0.153 | 1.722 (0.992–2.987) | ||
| Splenomegaly | 0.087 | 0.703 (0.472–01049) | ||
| Stage acc Ann Arbor | 0.855 | 0.957 (0.589–1.531) | ||
| Blastoid variant | 0.185 | 0.598 (0.282–1.270) | ||
| Deauville score | <0.001 | 0.137 (0.073–0.259) | <0.001 | 4.059 (2.573–6.403) |
| Treatment regimen | 0.655 | 0.857 (0.519–1.243) | ||
| OS | ||||
| Sex | 0.211 | 1.759 (0.577–6.033) | ||
| Age | 0.375 | 1.270 (0.722–2.369) | ||
| MIPI score | 0.025 | 0.711 (0.527–0.959) | 0.017 | 1.204 (1.032–1.403) |
| LDH level | 0.709 | 0.942 (0.690–1.287) | ||
| Β2 microglobulin | 0.524 | 1.128 (0.778–1.635) | ||
| Ki67 score | 0.195 | 1.250 (0.891–1.754) | ||
| Bulky disease | 0.390 | 0.828 (0.539–1.272) | ||
| Splenomegaly | 0.287 | 0.846 (0.622–1.150) | ||
| Stage acc Ann Arbor | 0.393 | 0.859 (0.606–1.217) | ||
| Blastoid variant | 0.075 | 0.618 (0.363–1.051) | ||
| Deauville score | 0.814 | 1.055 (0.671–1.660) | ||
| Treatment regimen | 0.598 | 1.001 (0.571–1.460) | ||
PFS: progression-free survival; OS: overall survival; HR: hazard ratio; CI: confidence interval; N: number.