Tristan Ruhwedel1, Julian M M Rogasch1,2, Kai Huang1, Henning Jann3, Imke Schatka1, Christian Furth1, Holger Amthauer1, Christoph Wetz1. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany. 2. Berlin Institute of Health (BIH), 13353 Berlin, Germany. 3. Department of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The De Ritis ratio (aspartate aminotransferase [AST]/alanine aminotransferase [ALT]) has demonstrated prognostic value in various cancer entities. We evaluated the prognostic capability of the De Ritis ratio in patients with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors (NET) undergoing peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). METHODS: Unicentric, retrospective analysis of 125 patients with NET undergoing PRRT with [177Lu]Lu-DOTATOC (female: 37%; median age: 66 years; G1+G2 NET: 95%). The prognostic value regarding progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed with univariable and multivariable Cox regression. Prognostic accuracy was determined with Harrell's C index and a likelihood ratio test. RESULTS: Progression, relapse, or death after PRRT was observed in 102/125 patients. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 15.8 months. Pancreatic or pulmonary origin, high De Ritis ratio, and high Chromogranin A (CgA) significantly predicted shorter PFS in univariable Cox. In multivariable Cox regression, only high De Ritis ratio >0.927 (HR: 1.7; p = 0.047) and high CgA >twice the upper normal limit (HR: 2.1; p = 0.005) remained independent predictors of shorter PFS. Adding the De Ritis ratio to the multivariable Cox model (age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, primary origin, CgA) significantly improved prognostic accuracy (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The De Ritis ratio is simple to obtain in clinical routine and can provide independent prognostic value for PFS in patients with NET undergoing PRRT.
BACKGROUND: The De Ritis ratio (aspartate aminotransferase [AST]/alanine aminotransferase [ALT]) has demonstrated prognostic value in various cancer entities. We evaluated the prognostic capability of the De Ritis ratio in patients with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors (NET) undergoing peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT). METHODS: Unicentric, retrospective analysis of 125 patients with NET undergoing PRRT with [177Lu]Lu-DOTATOC (female: 37%; median age: 66 years; G1+G2 NET: 95%). The prognostic value regarding progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed with univariable and multivariable Cox regression. Prognostic accuracy was determined with Harrell's C index and a likelihood ratio test. RESULTS: Progression, relapse, or death after PRRT was observed in 102/125 patients. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 15.8 months. Pancreatic or pulmonary origin, high De Ritis ratio, and high Chromogranin A (CgA) significantly predicted shorter PFS in univariable Cox. In multivariable Cox regression, only high De Ritis ratio >0.927 (HR: 1.7; p = 0.047) and high CgA >twice the upper normal limit (HR: 2.1; p = 0.005) remained independent predictors of shorter PFS. Adding the De Ritis ratio to the multivariable Cox model (age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, primary origin, CgA) significantly improved prognostic accuracy (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The De Ritis ratio is simple to obtain in clinical routine and can provide independent prognostic value for PFS in patients with NET undergoing PRRT.
Entities:
Keywords:
ALT; AST; CgA; Chromogranin A; DOTATOC; De Ritis ratio; NET; PRRT; neuroendocrine tumor; peptide receptor radio nuclide therapy
Authors: Angelika Bezan; Edvin Mrsic; Daniel Krieger; Tatjana Stojakovic; Karl Pummer; Richard Zigeuner; Georg C Hutterer; Martin Pichler Journal: J Urol Date: 2015-01-23 Impact factor: 7.450
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: 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: Jakob Michael Riedl; Florian Posch; Gerald Prager; Wolfgang Eisterer; Leopold Oehler; Thamer Sliwa; Klaus Wilthoner; Andreas Petzer; Petra Pichler; Eva Hubmann; Thomas Winder; Sonja Burgstaller; Markus Korger; Johannes Andel; Richard Greil; Hans-Joerg Neumann; Martin Pecherstorfer; Kathrin Philipp-Abbrederis; Angela Djanani; Birgit Gruenberger; Friedrich Laengle; Ewald Wöll; Armin Gerger Journal: Ther Adv Med Oncol Date: 2020-04-10 Impact factor: 8.168
Authors: Richard P Baum; Andreas W Kluge; Harshad Kulkarni; Ulrike Schorr-Neufing; Karin Niepsch; Norman Bitterlich; Cees J A van Echteld Journal: Theranostics Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: Markus Galler; Julian M M Rogasch; Kai Huang; Henning Jann; Kristina Plehm; Christoph Wetz; Holger Amthauer Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Fiona Ohlendorf; Rudolf A Werner; Christoph Henkenberens; Tobias L Ross; Hans Christiansen; Frank M Bengel; Thorsten Derlin Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-03-12