Cathy Zhou1, Brent Foster2, Rosalie Hagge1, Cameron Foster1, Leon Lenchik3, Abhijit J Chaudhari4, Robert D Boutin1,5. 1. Department of Radiology, UC Davis School of Medicine, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3100, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA. 2. Biomedical Engineering, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, 95616, USA. 3. Radiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, 27157, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, UC Davis School of Medicine, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3100, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA. ajchaudhari@ucdavis.edu. 5. Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: 18F-FDG PET is widely used to accurately stage numerous types of cancers. Although 18F-FDG PET/CT features of tumors aid in predicting patient prognosis, there is increasing interest in mining additional quantitative body composition data that could improve the prognostic power of 18F-FDG PET/CT, without additional examination costs or radiation exposure. The aim of this study was to determine the association between overall survival and body composition metrics derived from routine clinical 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. METHODS: Patients who received baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging during workup for newly diagnosed esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) were included. From these studies, psoas cross-sectional area (CSA), muscle attenuation (MA), SUVmean, and SUVmax were obtained. Correlation with overall survival was assessed using a Cox Proportional Hazards model, controlling for age, body mass index, 18F-FDG dose, glucose level, diabetes status, in-hospital status, and tumor stage. RESULTS: Among the 59 patients studied, psoas MA and SUVmax were found to be significant predictors of survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.99, p = 0.04, and HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.97, p = 0.04, respectively) and remained independent predictors. Psoas CSA and SUVmean did not significantly influence survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Characterization of psoas muscles as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia on baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging is relatively easily obtained and may offer additional prognostic value in patients with EAC.
OBJECTIVE:18F-FDG PET is widely used to accurately stage numerous types of cancers. Although 18F-FDG PET/CT features of tumors aid in predicting patient prognosis, there is increasing interest in mining additional quantitative body composition data that could improve the prognostic power of 18F-FDG PET/CT, without additional examination costs or radiation exposure. The aim of this study was to determine the association between overall survival and body composition metrics derived from routine clinical 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. METHODS:Patients who received baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging during workup for newly diagnosed esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) were included. From these studies, psoas cross-sectional area (CSA), muscle attenuation (MA), SUVmean, and SUVmax were obtained. Correlation with overall survival was assessed using a Cox Proportional Hazards model, controlling for age, body mass index, 18F-FDG dose, glucose level, diabetes status, in-hospital status, and tumor stage. RESULTS: Among the 59 patients studied, psoas MA and SUVmax were found to be significant predictors of survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.99, p = 0.04, and HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.97, p = 0.04, respectively) and remained independent predictors. Psoas CSA and SUVmean did not significantly influence survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Characterization of psoas muscles as a surrogate marker for sarcopenia on baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging is relatively easily obtained and may offer additional prognostic value in patients with EAC.
Entities:
Keywords:
Body composition; Esophageal adenocarcinoma; Myosteatosis; PET/CT; Sarcopenia
Authors: K H Sheetz; L Zhao; S A Holcombe; S C Wang; R M Reddy; J Lin; M B Orringer; A C Chang Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: Dennis R Taaffe; Tim R Henwood; Michael A Nalls; Duncan G Walker; Thomas F Lang; Tamara B Harris Journal: Gerontology Date: 2008-12-05 Impact factor: 5.140
Authors: Thomas W Barber; Cuong P Duong; Trevor Leong; Mathias Bressel; Elizabeth G Drummond; Rodney J Hicks Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2012-05-11 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Michael J Englesbe; Jay S Lee; Kevin He; Ludi Fan; Douglas E Schaubel; Kyle H Sheetz; Calista M Harbaugh; Sven A Holcombe; Darrel A Campbell; Christopher J Sonnenday; Stewart C Wang Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: J M T Omloo; M van Heijl; O S Hoekstra; M I van Berge Henegouwen; J J B van Lanschot; G W Sloof Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-05-03 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Joyce Faber; Madeleen J Uitdehaag; Manon Spaander; Sabine van Steenbergen-Langeveld; Paul Vos; Marloes Berkhout; Cor Lamers; Hans Rümke; Hugo Tilanus; Peter Siersema; Ardy van Helvoort; Ate van der Gaast Journal: J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 12.910
Authors: Abhijit J Chaudhari; William Y Raynor; Ali Gholamrezanezhad; Thomas J Werner; Chamith S Rajapakse; Abass Alavi Journal: PET Clin Date: 2021-01
Authors: Keunyoung Kim; In-Joo Kim; Kyoungjune Pak; Taewoo Kang; Young Mi Seol; Young Jin Choi; Hyojeong Kim Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2021-10-27 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Roberta M diFlorio-Alexander; Qingyuan Song; Dennis Dwan; Judith A Austin-Strohbehn; Kristen E Muller; William B Kinlaw; Todd A MacKenzie; Margaret R Karagas; Saeed Hassanpour Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Ying Zhou; Ningbo Hao; Zhongping Duan; Ming Kong; Manman Xu; Dan Zhang; Xiangxiang Xu; Qingwen Yuan; Changzheng Li Journal: Int J Gen Med Date: 2021-07-27