James C Reynolds1, Roberto Maass-Moreno2, Anish Thomas3, Alexander Ling2, Emerson B Padiernos4, Seth M Steinberg5, Raffit Hassan4. 1. Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland jreynolds@mail.cc.nih.gov. 2. Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 3. Developmental Therapeutics Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. 4. Thoracic and GI Malignancies Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland; and. 5. Biostatistics and Data Management Section, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Abstract
Cancer survival is related to tumor volume. 18F-FDG PET measurement of tumor volume holds promise but is not yet a clinical tool. Measurements come in 2 forms: the first is total lesion volume (TLV) based on the number of voxels in the tumor, and the second is total lesion glycolysis (TLG), which is the TLV multiplied by the average SUL (i.e., SUV normalized for lean mass) of the tumor (SULaverage). In this study, we measured tumor volume in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Methods: A threshold-based program in Interactive Data Language was developed to measure tumor volume in 18F-FDG PET images. Nineteen patients with MPM were studied before and after 2 cycles (6 wk) of chemoimmunotherapy. Measurements included TLV, TLG, the sum of the SULs in the tumor (SULtotal, a measure of total 18F-FDG uptake), and SULaverage Results: Baseline TLV ranged from 11 to 2,610 cm3 TLG ranged from 32 to 8,552 cm3 g/mL and correlated strongly with TLV. Although tumor volumes ranged over 3 orders of magnitude, SULaverage stayed within a narrow range of 2.4-5.3 units. Thus, TLV was the major component of TLG, whereas SULaverage was a minor component and was essentially constant. Further evaluation of SULaverage showed that in this cohort its 2 components, SULtotal and TLV, changed in parallel and were strongly correlated (r = 0.99, P < 0.01). Thus, whether the tumors were large or small, 18F-FDG uptake as measured by SULtotal was proportional to the TLV. Conclusion: TLG equals TLV multiplied by SULaverage, essentially TLV multiplied by a constant. Thus TLG, commonly considered a measure of metabolic activity in tumors, is also in this cohort a measure of tumor volume. The constancy of SULaverage is due to the fact that 18F-FDG uptake is proportional to tumor volume. Thus, in this study, 18F-FDG uptake was also a measure of volume.
Cancer survival is related to tumor volume. 18F-FDG PET measurement of tumor volume holds promise but is not yet a clinical tool. Measurements come in 2 forms: the first is total lesion volume (TLV) based on the number of voxels in the tumor, and the second is total lesion glycolysis (TLG), which is the TLV multiplied by the average SUL (i.e., SUV normalized for lean mass) of the tumor (SULaverage). In this study, we measured tumor volume in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Methods: A threshold-based program in Interactive Data Language was developed to measure tumor volume in 18F-FDG PET images. Nineteen patients with MPM were studied before and after 2 cycles (6 wk) of chemoimmunotherapy. Measurements included TLV, TLG, the sum of the SULs in the tumor (SULtotal, a measure of total 18F-FDG uptake), and SULaverage Results: Baseline TLV ranged from 11 to 2,610 cm3 TLG ranged from 32 to 8,552 cm3 g/mL and correlated strongly with TLV. Although tumor volumes ranged over 3 orders of magnitude, SULaverage stayed within a narrow range of 2.4-5.3 units. Thus, TLV was the major component of TLG, whereas SULaverage was a minor component and was essentially constant. Further evaluation of SULaverage showed that in this cohort its 2 components, SULtotal and TLV, changed in parallel and were strongly correlated (r = 0.99, P < 0.01). Thus, whether the tumors were large or small, 18F-FDG uptake as measured by SULtotal was proportional to the TLV. Conclusion: TLG equals TLV multiplied by SULaverage, essentially TLV multiplied by a constant. Thus TLG, commonly considered a measure of metabolic activity in tumors, is also in this cohort a measure of tumor volume. The constancy of SULaverage is due to the fact that 18F-FDG uptake is proportional to tumor volume. Thus, in this study, 18F-FDG uptake was also a measure of volume.
Authors: Valerie W Rusch; Ritu Gill; Alan Mitchell; David Naidich; David C Rice; Harvey I Pass; Hedy L Kindler; Marc De Perrot; Joseph Friedberg Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2016-09-02 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: H Young; R Baum; U Cremerius; K Herholz; O Hoekstra; A A Lammertsma; J Pruim; P Price Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Patrick Veit-Haibach; Niklaus G Schaefer; Hans C Steinert; Jan D Soyka; Burkhardt Seifert; Rolf A Stahel Journal: Lung Cancer Date: 2009-05-30 Impact factor: 5.705
Authors: Raffit Hassan; Elad Sharon; Anish Thomas; Jingli Zhang; Alexander Ling; Markku Miettinen; Robert J Kreitman; Seth M Steinberg; Kevin Hollevoet; Ira Pastan Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-07-02 Impact factor: 6.921