Esben Andreas Carlsen1,2, Camilla Bardram Johnbeck1,2, Tina Binderup1,2, Mathias Loft1,2, Andreas Pfeifer1,2, Jann Mortensen1,2, Peter Oturai1,2, Annika Loft1,2, Anne Kiil Berthelsen1,2, Seppo W Langer2,3, Ulrich Knigge2,4, Andreas Kjaer5,2. 1. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2. ENETS Neuroendocrine Tumor Center of Excellence, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark; and. 4. Departments of Clinical Endocrinology and Surgical Gastroenterology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 5. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET and Cluster for Molecular Imaging, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Rigshospitalet and University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark akjaer@sund.ku.dk.
Abstract
Overexpression of somatostatin receptors (SSTRs) in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) is used for both diagnosis and treatment. Receptor density may reflect tumor differentiation and thus be associated with prognosis. Noninvasive visualization and quantification of SSTR density is possible by SSTR imaging (SRI) using PET. Recently, we introduced 64Cu-DOTATATE for SRI, and we hypothesized that uptake of this tracer could be associated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: We evaluated patients with NENs who underwent 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT SRI in 2 prospective studies. Tracer uptake was determined as the maximal SUV (SUVmax) for each patient. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank was used to determine the predictive value of 64Cu-DOTATATE SUVmax for OS and PFS. Specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy were calculated for prediction of outcome at 24 mo after 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT. Results: In total, 128 patients with NENs were included and followed for a median of 73 mo (range, 1-112 mo). During follow-up, 112 experienced disease progression, and 69 died. The optimal cutoff for 64Cu-DOTATATE SUVmax was 43.3 for prediction of PFS, with a hazard ratio of 0.56 (95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.84) for patients with an SUVmax of more than 43.3. However, no significant cutoff was found for prediction of OS. In multiple Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, primary tumor site, and tumor grade, the SUVmax cutoff hazard ratio was 0.50 (range, 0.32-0.77) for PFS. The accuracy was moderate for predicting PFS (57%) at 24 mo after 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT. Conclusion: In this first study to report the association of 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT and outcome in patients with NENs, tumor SSTR density as visualized with 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT was prognostic for PFS but not OS. However, the accuracy of prediction of PFS at 24 mo after 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT SRI was moderate, limiting the value on an individual-patient basis.
Overexpression of somatostatin receptors (SSTRs) in patients with neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) is used for both diagnosis and treatment. Receptor density may reflect tumor differentiation and thus be associated with prognosis. Noninvasive visualization and quantification of SSTR density is possible by SSTR imaging (SRI) using PET. Recently, we introduced 64Cu-DOTATATE for SRI, and we hypothesized that uptake of this tracer could be associated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: We evaluated patients with NENs who underwent 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT SRI in 2 prospective studies. Tracer uptake was determined as the maximal SUV (SUVmax) for each patient. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank was used to determine the predictive value of 64Cu-DOTATATE SUVmax for OS and PFS. Specificity, sensitivity, and accuracy were calculated for prediction of outcome at 24 mo after 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT. Results: In total, 128 patients with NENs were included and followed for a median of 73 mo (range, 1-112 mo). During follow-up, 112 experienced disease progression, and 69 died. The optimal cutoff for 64Cu-DOTATATE SUVmax was 43.3 for prediction of PFS, with a hazard ratio of 0.56 (95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.84) for patients with an SUVmax of more than 43.3. However, no significant cutoff was found for prediction of OS. In multiple Cox regression adjusted for age, sex, primary tumor site, and tumor grade, the SUVmax cutoff hazard ratio was 0.50 (range, 0.32-0.77) for PFS. The accuracy was moderate for predicting PFS (57%) at 24 mo after 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT. Conclusion: In this first study to report the association of 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT and outcome in patients with NENs, tumor SSTR density as visualized with 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT was prognostic for PFS but not OS. However, the accuracy of prediction of PFS at 24 mo after 64Cu-DOTATATE PET/CT SRI was moderate, limiting the value on an individual-patient basis.
Authors: Jonathan Strosberg; Ghassan El-Haddad; Edward Wolin; Andrew Hendifar; James Yao; Beth Chasen; Erik Mittra; Pamela L Kunz; Matthew H Kulke; Heather Jacene; David Bushnell; Thomas M O'Dorisio; Richard P Baum; Harshad R Kulkarni; Martyn Caplin; Rachida Lebtahi; Timothy Hobday; Ebrahim Delpassand; Eric Van Cutsem; Al Benson; Rajaventhan Srirajaskanthan; Marianne Pavel; Jaime Mora; Jordan Berlin; Enrique Grande; Nicholas Reed; Ettore Seregni; Kjell Öberg; Maribel Lopera Sierra; Paola Santoro; Thomas Thevenet; Jack L Erion; Philippe Ruszniewski; Dik Kwekkeboom; Eric Krenning Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Philippe Brunner; Ann-Catherine Jörg; Katharina Glatz; Lukas Bubendorf; Piotr Radojewski; Maria Umlauft; Nicolas Marincek; Petar-Marko Spanjol; Thomas Krause; Rebecca A Dumont; Helmut R Maecke; Jan Müller-Brand; Matthias Briel; Anja Schmitt; Aurel Perren; Martin A Walter Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-08-18 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Andreas Pfeifer; Ulrich Knigge; Tina Binderup; Jann Mortensen; Peter Oturai; Annika Loft; Anne Kiil Berthelsen; Seppo W Langer; Palle Rasmussen; Dennis Elema; Eric von Benzon; Liselotte Højgaard; Andreas Kjaer Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-05-07 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: James C Yao; Manal Hassan; Alexandria Phan; Cecile Dagohoy; Colleen Leary; Jeannette E Mares; Eddie K Abdalla; Jason B Fleming; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Asif Rashid; Douglas B Evans Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
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: V Zamora; A Cabanne; R Salanova; C Bestani; E Domenichini; F Marmissolle; N Giacomi; J O'Connor; G Méndez; E Roca Journal: Dig Liver Dis Date: 2009-10-12 Impact factor: 4.088
Authors: Walter Koch; Christoph J Auernhammer; Julia Geisler; Christine Spitzweg; Clemens C Cyran; Harun Ilhan; Peter Bartenstein; Alexander R Haug Journal: Mol Imaging Date: 2014 Impact factor: 4.488
Authors: Jan Budczies; Frederick Klauschen; Bruno V Sinn; Balázs Győrffy; Wolfgang D Schmitt; Silvia Darb-Esfahani; Carsten Denkert Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-12-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Alexandra I Fonseca; Vítor H Alves; Sérgio J C do Carmo; Magda Silva; Ivanna Hrynchak; Francisco Alves; Amílcar Falcão; Antero J Abrunhosa Journal: Pharmaceuticals (Basel) Date: 2022-06-07
Authors: Esben Andreas Carlsen; Camilla Bardram Johnbeck; Mathias Loft; Andreas Pfeifer; Peter Oturai; Seppo W Langer; Ulrich Knigge; Claes Nøhr Ladefoged; Andreas Kjaer Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 11.082
Authors: Sander C Ebbers; Muriël Heimgartner; Maarten W Barentsz; Rachel S van Leeuwaarde; Mark J C van Treijen; Marnix M E G Lam; Arthur J A T Braat Journal: Eur J Hybrid Imaging Date: 2021-12-09