Tine Nøhr Christensen1,2, Seppo W Langer3, Katrine Engholm Villumsen4, Helle Hjorth Johannesen4, Johan Löfgren4, Sune Høgild Keller4, Adam Espe Hansen4, Andreas Kjaer4,5, Barbara Malene Fischer4,6. 1. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. tine.noehr.christensen.02@regionh.dk. 2. Cluster for Molecular Imaging, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. tine.noehr.christensen.02@regionh.dk. 3. Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine & PET, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. 5. Cluster for Molecular Imaging, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 6. PET Centre, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Science, Kings College London, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive cancer often presenting in an advanced stage and prognosis is poor. Early response evaluation may have impact on the treatment strategy. AIM: We evaluated 18F-fluorothymidine-(FLT)-PET/diffusion-weighted-(DW)-MRI early after treatment start to describe biological changes during therapy, the potential of early response evaluation, and the added value of FLT-PET/DW-MRI. METHODS: Patients with SCLC referred for standard chemotherapy were eligible. FLT-PET/DW-MRI of the chest and brain was acquired within 14 days after treatment start. FLT-PET/DW-MRI was compared with pretreatment FDG-PET/CT. Standardized uptake value (SUV), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and functional tumor volumes were measured. FDG-SUVpeak, FLT-SUVpeak, and ADCmedian; spatial distribution of aggressive areas; and voxel-by-voxel analyses were evaluated to compare the biological information derived from the three functional imaging modalities. FDG-SUVpeak, FLT-SUVpeak, and ADCmedian were also analyzed for ability to predict final treatment response. RESULTS: Twelve patients with SCLC completed FLT-PET/MRI 1-9 days after treatment start. In nine patients, pretreatment FDG-PET/CT was available for comparison. A total of 16 T-sites and 12 N-sites were identified. No brain metastases were detected. FDG-SUVpeak was 2.0-22.7 in T-sites and 5.5-17.3 in N-sites. FLT-SUVpeak was 0.6-11.5 in T-sites and 1.2-2.4 in N-sites. ADCmedian was 0.76-1.74 × 10- 3 mm2/s in T-sites and 0.88-2.09 × 10-3 mm2/s in N-sites. FLT-SUVpeak correlated with FDG-SUVpeak, and voxel-by-voxel correlation was positive, though the hottest regions were dissimilarly distributed in FLT-PET compared to FDG-PET. FLT-SUVpeak was not correlated with ADCmedian, and voxel-by-voxel analyses and spatial distribution of aggressive areas varied with no systematic relation. LT-SUVpeak was significantly lower in responding lesions than non-responding lesions (mean FLT-SUVpeak in T-sites: 1.5 vs. 5.7; p = 0.007, mean FLT-SUVpeak in N-sites: 1.6 vs. 2.2; p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: FLT-PET and DW-MRI performed early after treatment start may add biological information in patients with SCLC. Proliferation early after treatment start measured by FLT-PET is a promising predictor for final treatment response that warrants further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02995902. Registered 11 December 2014 - Retrospectively registered.
BACKGROUND:Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive cancer often presenting in an advanced stage and prognosis is poor. Early response evaluation may have impact on the treatment strategy. AIM: We evaluated 18F-fluorothymidine-(FLT)-PET/diffusion-weighted-(DW)-MRI early after treatment start to describe biological changes during therapy, the potential of early response evaluation, and the added value of FLT-PET/DW-MRI. METHODS:Patients with SCLC referred for standard chemotherapy were eligible. FLT-PET/DW-MRI of the chest and brain was acquired within 14 days after treatment start. FLT-PET/DW-MRI was compared with pretreatment FDG-PET/CT. Standardized uptake value (SUV), apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), and functional tumor volumes were measured. FDG-SUVpeak, FLT-SUVpeak, and ADCmedian; spatial distribution of aggressive areas; and voxel-by-voxel analyses were evaluated to compare the biological information derived from the three functional imaging modalities. FDG-SUVpeak, FLT-SUVpeak, and ADCmedian were also analyzed for ability to predict final treatment response. RESULTS: Twelve patients with SCLC completed FLT-PET/MRI 1-9 days after treatment start. In nine patients, pretreatment FDG-PET/CT was available for comparison. A total of 16 T-sites and 12 N-sites were identified. No brain metastases were detected. FDG-SUVpeak was 2.0-22.7 in T-sites and 5.5-17.3 in N-sites. FLT-SUVpeak was 0.6-11.5 in T-sites and 1.2-2.4 in N-sites. ADCmedian was 0.76-1.74 × 10- 3 mm2/s in T-sites and 0.88-2.09 × 10-3 mm2/s in N-sites. FLT-SUVpeak correlated with FDG-SUVpeak, and voxel-by-voxel correlation was positive, though the hottest regions were dissimilarly distributed in FLT-PET compared to FDG-PET. FLT-SUVpeak was not correlated with ADCmedian, and voxel-by-voxel analyses and spatial distribution of aggressive areas varied with no systematic relation. LT-SUVpeak was significantly lower in responding lesions than non-responding lesions (mean FLT-SUVpeak in T-sites: 1.5 vs. 5.7; p = 0.007, mean FLT-SUVpeak in N-sites: 1.6 vs. 2.2; p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: FLT-PET and DW-MRI performed early after treatment start may add biological information in patients with SCLC. Proliferation early after treatment start measured by FLT-PET is a promising predictor for final treatment response that warrants further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02995902. Registered 11 December 2014 - Retrospectively registered.
Entities:
Keywords:
18F-fluorothymidine; DW-MRI; Diffusion-weighted MRI; Early treatment evaluation; FLT-PET; PET/MRI; Prediction of response; Response evaluation; SCLC; Small cell lung cancer
Authors: J Scott Brockenbrough; Timothee Souquet; Janice K Morihara; Joshua E Stern; Stephen E Hawes; Janet S Rasey; Antoine Leblond; Linda W Wiens; Qinghua Feng; John Grierson; Hubert Vesselle Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2011-07-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Sarah Everitt; David Ball; Rodney J Hicks; Jason Callahan; Nikki Plumridge; Jenny Trinh; Alan Herschtal; Tomas Kron; Michael Mac Manus Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-07-29 Impact factor: 7.038
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: Helmut Dittmann; Bernhard Matthias Dohmen; Frank Paulsen; Kai Eichhorn; Susanne Martina Eschmann; Marius Horger; Manfred Wehrmann; Hans Juergen Machulla; Roland Bares Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2003-07-26 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Sarah J Everitt; David L Ball; Rodney J Hicks; Jason Callahan; Nikki Plumridge; Marnie Collins; Alan Herschtal; David Binns; Tomas Kron; Michal Schneider; Michael MacManus Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Matthijs C F Cysouw; Gerbrand M Kramer; Virginie Frings; Adrianus J De Langen; Mariëlle J Wondergem; Laura M Kenny; Eric O Aboagye; Carsten Kobe; Jürgen Wolf; Otto S Hoekstra; Ronald Boellaard Journal: Nucl Med Biol Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 2.408
Authors: Ronald Boellaard; Roberto Delgado-Bolton; Wim J G Oyen; Francesco Giammarile; Klaus Tatsch; Wolfgang Eschner; Fred J Verzijlbergen; Sally F Barrington; Lucy C Pike; Wolfgang A Weber; Sigrid Stroobants; Dominique Delbeke; Kevin J Donohoe; Scott Holbrook; Michael M Graham; Giorgio Testanera; Otto S Hoekstra; Josee Zijlstra; Eric Visser; Corneline J Hoekstra; Jan Pruim; Antoon Willemsen; Bertjan Arends; Jörg Kotzerke; Andreas Bockisch; Thomas Beyer; Arturo Chiti; Bernd J Krause Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: John P Crandall; Abdel K Tahari; Rosalyn A Juergens; Julie R Brahmer; Charles M Rudin; Giuseppe Esposito; Deepa S Subramaniam; Michael V Knopp; Nathan C Hall; Prateek Gajwani; Jeffrey P Leal; Martin A Lodge; Joo H O; Edward W Gabrielson; Lalitha K Shankar; Richard L Wahl Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2017-01-19 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Sonja Schelhaas; Lynn Johann Frohwein; Lydia Wachsmuth; Sven Hermann; Cornelius Faber; Klaus P Schäfers; Andreas H Jacobs Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.484