Bingxin Gu1,2,3,4, Lingfang Xia2,5, Huijuan Ge2,6, Shuai Liu1,2,3,4. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China. 2. Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China. 3. Center for Biomedical Imaging, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China. 4. Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Molecular Imaging Probes, Shanghai 200032, China. 5. Department of Gynecological Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China. 6. Department of Pathology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To assess the ability of preoperative positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scans to predict postoperative residual disease in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC). METHODS: Thirty-one women with suspected AEOC were enrolled in our prospective study before surgery from July 2016 to December 2017. Complete resection was determined as no residual disease (R0) after surgery. A PET/CT scan was obtained within 2 weeks before surgery in our hospital. The PET score was the sum of each score of the radiological criteria from Suidan's model. The correlations between the PET score and tumor burden and surgical complexity were evaluated by Pearson correlation analysis. T-test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare differences in the variables between the complete and incomplete resection groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of the PET score for predicting complete postoperative resection. RESULTS: The median [range] of PET score was 2 [0-8], and the PET score in 20 (65%) patients was less than 3. Complete resection was achieved in 11 (35.5%) patients after surgery, including 10 (90.91%) with low PET scores and only 1 (9.09%) with a high score. The PET score had a significant positive correlation with tumor burden [Eisenkop: r=0.603, P<0.001; peritoneal cancer index (PCI): r=0.522, P=0.003] but not with surgery complexity (Aletti: r=0.291, P=0.113). Patients with lower PET scores (P=0.046) and tumor burdens (Eisenkop: P=0.013; PCI: P=0.012) had higher rates of complete resection. The PET score and tumor burden were effective for predicting complete resection. The AUCPET, AUCEisenkop, and AUCPCI were 0.797 (95% CI: 0.633-0.961, P=0.01), 0.847 (95% CI: 0.707-0.988, P=0.003), and 0.811 (95% CI: 0.653-0.969, P=0.007), respectively. However, surgery complexity was not useful for assessing complete resection. CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative PET score can noninvasively reflect tumor burden and helps predict complete resection after surgery in AEOC patients. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: To assess the ability of preoperative positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scans to predict postoperative residual disease in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC). METHODS: Thirty-one women with suspected AEOC were enrolled in our prospective study before surgery from July 2016 to December 2017. Complete resection was determined as no residual disease (R0) after surgery. A PET/CT scan was obtained within 2 weeks before surgery in our hospital. The PET score was the sum of each score of the radiological criteria from Suidan's model. The correlations between the PET score and tumor burden and surgical complexity were evaluated by Pearson correlation analysis. T-test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare differences in the variables between the complete and incomplete resection groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to assess the accuracy of the PET score for predicting complete postoperative resection. RESULTS: The median [range] of PET score was 2 [0-8], and the PET score in 20 (65%) patients was less than 3. Complete resection was achieved in 11 (35.5%) patients after surgery, including 10 (90.91%) with low PET scores and only 1 (9.09%) with a high score. The PET score had a significant positive correlation with tumor burden [Eisenkop: r=0.603, P<0.001; peritoneal cancer index (PCI): r=0.522, P=0.003] but not with surgery complexity (Aletti: r=0.291, P=0.113). Patients with lower PET scores (P=0.046) and tumor burdens (Eisenkop: P=0.013; PCI: P=0.012) had higher rates of complete resection. The PET score and tumor burden were effective for predicting complete resection. The AUCPET, AUCEisenkop, and AUCPCI were 0.797 (95% CI: 0.633-0.961, P=0.01), 0.847 (95% CI: 0.707-0.988, P=0.003), and 0.811 (95% CI: 0.653-0.969, P=0.007), respectively. However, surgery complexity was not useful for assessing complete resection. CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative PET score can noninvasively reflect tumor burden and helps predict complete resection after surgery in AEOC patients. 2020 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
Authors: Johanna Hynninen; Jukka Kemppainen; Maija Lavonius; Johanna Virtanen; Jaakko Matomäki; Sinikka Oksa; Olli Carpén; Seija Grénman; Marko Seppänen; Annika Auranen Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2013-08-29 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: D S Chi; E L Eisenhauer; J Lang; J Huh; L Haddad; N R Abu-Rustum; Y Sonoda; D A Levine; M Hensley; R R Barakat Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2006-05-22 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Eun Ji Nam; Mi Jin Yun; Young Taik Oh; Jae Wook Kim; Jae Hoon Kim; Sunghoon Kim; Yong Wook Jung; Sang Wun Kim; Young Tae Kim Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2009-11-18 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Robert J Morgan; Ronald D Alvarez; Deborah K Armstrong; Robert A Burger; Lee-may Chen; Larry Copeland; Marta Ann Crispens; David M Gershenson; Heidi J Gray; Ardeshir Hakam; Laura J Havrilesky; Carolyn Johnston; Shashikant Lele; Lainie Martin; Ursula A Matulonis; David M O'Malley; Richard T Penson; Matthew A Powell; Steven W Remmenga; Paul Sabbatini; Joseph T Santoso; Julian C Schink; Nelson Teng; Theresa L Werner; Mary A Dwyer; Miranda Hughes Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2013-10-01 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: S Risum; C Høgdall; A Loft; A K Berthelsen; E Høgdall; L Nedergaard; L Lundvall; S A Engelholm Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2007-12-04 Impact factor: 5.482