| Literature DB >> 32034487 |
Kristine E Fasmer1,2, Ankush Gulati3, Julie A Dybvik3, Sigmund Ytre-Hauge3,4, Øyvind Salvesen5, Jone Trovik6,7, Camilla Krakstad6,7, Ingfrid S Haldorsen3,4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI tumor markers for prediction of lymph node metastases (LNM) and aggressive disease in endometrial cancer (EC).Entities:
Keywords: 18F-FDG; Endometrial cancer; Lymphatic metastasis; Magnetic resonance imaging; PET-CT
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32034487 PMCID: PMC7160067 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-019-06622-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
Fig. 1Pelvic MRI (a–c) and whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT (d–f) of a 60-year-old patient with endometrial carcinoma, FIGO stage IIIC (endometrioid, grade 3). a Axial oblique contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MRI and (b) sagittal T2-weighted MRI for measurement of maximum tumor diameters in three orthogonal planes (AP, TV, and CC diameters). c On apparent diffusion coefficient map, the tumor (arrow) is depicted as hypointense indicating restricted diffusion. d Axial and (e) frontal 18F-FDG PET/CT show the metabolic tumor volume (MTV) (red line shows the MTV boundaries) in which the maximum and mean standardized uptake values are measured. f Maximum intensity projection map depicts the 18F-FDG-avid primary tumor (white arrow) and 18F-FDG-avid pelvic metastatic lymph nodes (black arrows)
Patient characteristics and surgicopathological findings in 215 endometrial cancer patients
| Age, mean (range) | 68 (30–90) |
| BMI, mean (range) | 29 (16–53) |
| Postmenopausal, | 204 (95%) |
| Risk status* from preoperative biopsy/curettage | |
| Low risk | 144 (67%) |
| High risk | 71 (33%) |
| FIGO stage†, | |
| Stage IA | 123 (57%) |
| Stage IB | 48 (22%) |
| Stage II | 18 (8%) |
| Stage IIIA | 3 (1%) |
| Stage IIIB | 4 (2%) |
| Stage IIIC1 | 12 (6%) |
| Stage IIIC2 | 1 (1%) |
| Stage IVA | 1 (1%) |
| Stage IVB | 5 (2%) |
| Histologic subtype†, | |
| Endometrioid | 172 (80%) |
| Non-endometrioid | 39 (18%) |
| Undifferentiated/other | 4 (2%) |
| Histologic grade† (endometrioid only), | |
| Grade 1 | 98 (57%) |
| Grade 2 | 42 (24%) |
| Grade 3 | 27 (16%) |
| Missing | 5 (3%) |
| Myometrial invasion†, | |
| < 50% | 140 (65%) |
| ≥ 50% | 72 (34%) |
| Missing | 3 (1%) |
| Cervical stroma invasion†, | |
| No | 180 (84%) |
| Yes | 31 (14%) |
| Uterus not removed | 4 (2%) |
| Lymphadenectomy†, | |
| Pelvic | 95 (44%) |
| Pelvic + paraaortic | 43 (20%) |
| No | 77 (36%) |
| Lymph node metastases†, | |
| No | 122 (57%) |
| Yes | 16 (7%) |
| Not investigated | 77 (36%) |
BMI, body mass index; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics
*Low risk: endometrioid subtype grades 1 and 2; high risk: endometrioid subtype grade 3 and non-endometrioid subtype
†Findings from surgical and pathological staging
Median (range) values and correlation (Spearman’s rho, r) between 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI tumor markers analyzed in a cohort of 215 endometrial cancer patients
| SUVmax | SUVmean | MTV | VMRI | ADCmean | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median (range) | 14.1 (2.8–39.0) | 5.4 (2.3–15.2) | 16 (0–744) ml | 9 (0–795) ml | 779 (383–1665) × 10−6 mm2/s |
| SUVmax | 1 (200) | 0.90* (199) | 0.72* (200) | 0.56* (200) | − 0.40* (192) |
| SUVmean | - | 1 (199) | 0.70* (199) | 0.61* (199) | − 0.38* (191) |
| MTV | - | - | 1 (215) | 0.83* (215) | − 0.43* (203) |
| VMRI | - | - | - | 1 (215) | − 0.38* (203) |
| ADCmean | - | - | - | - | 1 (203) |
SUV, standardized uptake value; MTV, metabolic tumor volume; V, tumor volume from MRI; ADC, apparent diffusion coefficient
*Correlation is significant, p < 0.001 (2-tailed)
18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI tumor markers in relation to surgical and histological tumor characteristics in 215 endometrial cancer patients
| SUVmax ( | SUVmean ( | MTV (ml) ( | VMRI (ml) ( | ADCmean (10−6 mm2/s) ( | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | Median (95% CI) | Median (95% CI) | Median (95% CI) | Median (95% CI) | Median (95% CI) | ||||||||||
| Myometrial invasion† | |||||||||||||||
| < 50% | 125 | 12.3 (10.6–14.2) | 124 | 4.8 (4.4–5.4) | 140 | 11 (9–14) | 140 | 5 (3–7) | 131 | 808 (783–856) | |||||
| ≥ 50% | 72 | 16.6 (14.4–18.1) | 72 | 6.4 (5.5–6.8) | 72 | 26 (22–37) | 72 | 16 (11–20) | 69 | 715 (672–742) | |||||
| Cervical stroma invasion† | 0.15 | 0.16 | 0.89 | ||||||||||||
| No | 165 | 13.2 (12.1–15.0) | 164 | 5.2 (4.9–5.6) | 180 | 15 (13–17) | 180 | 8 (6–9) | 170 | 778 (737–797) | |||||
| Yes | 31 | 15.9 (12.3–19.0) | 31 | 6.0 (4.9–6.6) | 31 | 27 (16–43) | 31 | 11 (8–19) | 29 | 787 (736–820) | |||||
| Lymph node metastases† | 0.12 | 0.69 | |||||||||||||
| No | 115 | 14.4 (13.0–16.1) | 114 | 5.6 (5.2–6.3) | 122 | 16 (13–18) | 122 | 9 (7–10) | 117 | 781 (735–804) | |||||
| Yes | 16 | 17.9 (12.1–25.0) | 16 | 6.6 (4.8–8.8) | 16 | 43 (28–101) | 16 | 27 (11–61) | 16 | 762 (655–851) | |||||
| Histological type† | 0.93 | 0.91 | 0.63 | 0.40 | 0.95 | ||||||||||
| Endometrioid | 161 | 13.8 (12.5–15.9) | 160 | 5.3 (4.9–5.6) | 172 | 16 (13–19) | 172 | 9 (6–10) | 162 | 775 (737–793) | |||||
| Non-endometrioid | 35 | 14.2 (11.8–17.8) | 35 | 5.5 (4.6–6.4) | 39 | 16 (10–37) | 39 | 10 (5–16) | 37 | 797 (738–823) | |||||
| Histological grade (endometrioid)† | |||||||||||||||
| Grade 1 + 2 | 131 | 12.7 (11.0–14.4) | 130 | 5.0 (4.7–5.4) | 140 | 14 (11–17) | 140 | 8 (4–9) | 130 | 784 (755–820) | |||||
| Grade 3 | 26 | 20.3 (17.0–23.6) | 26 | 7.5 (6.2–8.0) | 27 | 35 (17–94) | 27 | 23 (14–49) | 27 | 676 (598–735) | |||||
| FIGO stage† | |||||||||||||||
| Stage I + II | 175 | 13.2 (12.3–14.9) | 174 | 5.2 (4.9–5.5) | 189 | 15 (13–17) | 189 | 8 (5–9) | 177 | 785 (756–808) | |||||
| Stage III + IV | 25 | 18.0 (14.1–21.6) | 25 | 6.9 (5.6–8.0) | 26 | 53 (29–70) | 26 | 27 (14–51) | 26 | 730 (655–785) | |||||
SUV, standardized uptake value; MTV, metabolic tumor volume; V, tumor volume from MRI; ADC, apparent diffusion coefficient; CI, confidence interval; FIGO, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics
*Mann-Whitney U test, two-tailed. Significant p values are given in italics
†Findings from surgical and pathological staging. Three of the patients did not undergo surgical treatment and one patient underwent tumor debulking. For these patients, final FIGO stages are based on uterine biopsy
‡Of the 215 patients in the cohort, 200 patients had increased 18F-FDG uptake in the uterus
§One of the 200 patients with increased 18F-FDG uptake in the uterus had SUVmax < 2.5, and hence, no SUVmean value could be calculated
**For 12 patients, diffusion-weighted MRI with generation of ADC maps were not possible to perform
Fig. 2Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for prediction of lymph node metastases for 18F-FDG PET/CT- and MRI-based tumor markers. ADCmean, mean tumor apparent diffusion coefficient; MI ≥ 50%, MRI-assessed myometrial invasion ≥ 50%; MRI-positive lymph nodes (LN), enlarged LN based on conventional MRI reading (short-axis diameter ≥ 10 mm); MTV, metabolic tumor volume; SUVmax, maximum tumor standardized uptake value; SUVmean, mean tumor standardized uptake value; PET-positive LN, LN with SUVmax ≥ 2.5; VMRI, MRI-based tumor volume. p value refers to test of equal AUC values across tumor imaging parameters
Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, accuracy, and OR for prediction of pelvic lymph node metastases in n = 138 endometrial cancer patients subjected to lymphadenectomy, by MTV larger than 27 ml, VMRI larger than 10 ml, and detected lymph nodes (LN) from conventional 18F FDG PET/CT reading and MRI reading
| MTV > 27 ml* | VMRI > 10 ml* | PET-positive LN | MRI-positive LN | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity (%, no. of patients) | 81 (13/16) | 88 (14/16) | 50 (8/16) | 31 (5/16) | ||
| Specificity (%, no. of patients) | 74 (90/122) | 58 (71/122) | 93(113/122) | 94 (115/122) | ||
| PPV (%) | 29 | 22 | 47 | 42 | ||
| NPV (%) | 97 | 97 | 93 | 91 | ||
| Accuracy (%) | 75 | 62 | 88 | 87 | ||
| Univariate OR (95% CI) | 12.2 (3.3–45.6) | 9.7 (2.1–44.8) | 12.6 (3.8–41.4) | 7.5 (2.0–27.5) | ||
| Multivariate OR‡ (95% CI) | 4.5 (0.7–27.6) | 2.4 (0.3–20.3) | 7.8 (1.7–35.1) | 1.5 (0.2–9.1) | ||
Significant p values are given in italics
PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; OR, odds ratio; MTV, metabolic tumor volume; V, tumor volume measured from MRI; CI, confidence interval
*Optimal cutoff value for MTV and VMRI based on the receiver operating characteristic analysis (Youden’s index) for prediction of lymph node metastases
†Binary logistic regression analyses
‡Adjusted for risk status based on preoperative endometrial biopsy/curettage indicating endometrioid grade 3 or non-endometrioid histology, in addition to the listed imaging variables
§McNemar’s test (p, two-tailed) for comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy between MTV > 27 ml versus VMRI > 10 ml and PET-positive LN versus MRI-positive LN, respectively
Cox regression analyses of preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI markers for prediction of progression-free survival in 215 patients with endometrial cancer
| Imaging variables | Univariate HR (95% CI) | Adjusted† HR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MTV | 1.003 (1.001–1.006) | 1.002 (0.999–1.005) | 0.13 | |
| MTV > 27 ml | 3.6 (1.8–7.4) | 2.7 (1.3–5.7) | ||
| PET-positive LN | 4.0 (1.8–9.1) | 3.3 (1.5–7.5) | ||
| VMRI | 1.002 (0.999–1.005) | - | - | |
| VMRI > 10 ml | 4.1 (1.8–9.2) | 3.2 (1.4–7.3) | ||
| MRI-positive LN | 5.6 (2.5–12.7) | 4.3 (1.9–10.0) |
Significant p values are given in italics
HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; MTV, metabolic tumor volume; V, tumor volume from MRI
†Adjusted for risk status based on preoperative endometrial biopsy/curettage indicating endometrioid grade 3 or non-endometrioid histology and patient age at primary treatment
Fig. 3Kaplan-Meier survival curves depicting progression-free survival according to a 18F-FDG PET/CT-based metabolic tumor volume (MTV) ≤ 27 versus > 27 ml and b MRI-based tumor volume (VMRI) ≤ 10 versus > 10 ml. P values refer to the log-rank test. For each category: number of cases (number of cases with progression)