| Literature DB >> 34621120 |
Jijin Yao1,2, Ying Wang3, Yujing Lin4, Yingying Yang5, Jingjing Wan3, Xiaohua Gong1, Fanwei Zhang3, Wangjian Zhang6, Tia Marks7, Siyang Wang1, Hongjun Jin2, Hong Shan2,8.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the role of maximal standardized uptake values (SUVmax) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) from serial 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for early prediction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) response in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (LANPC).Entities:
Keywords: PET/CT; nasopharyngeal carcinoma; neoadjuvant chemotherapy; nomogram; tumor response
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34621120 PMCID: PMC8491868 DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S330154
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drug Des Devel Ther ISSN: 1177-8881 Impact factor: 4.162
Figure 1Flowchart demonstrating patient selection in final analysis along with exclusion criteria.
Clinical Characteristics of 121 Patients with LANPC
| Characteristic | No. of Patients | % |
|---|---|---|
| SUVmax-PT, Median ± SD | 10.6 ± 4.7 | NA |
| TLG-PT, Median ± SD | 54.5 ± 49.8 | NA |
| NAC response | ||
| Good response | 96 | 79.3 |
| Poor response | 25 | 20.7 |
| NAC regimen | ||
| GP | 54 | 44.6 |
| TP/PF | 48 | 39.7 |
| TPF | 19 | 15.7 |
| Age, years | ||
| < 50 | 62 | 51.2 |
| ≥ 50 | 59 | 48.8 |
| Gender | ||
| Male | 94 | 77.7 |
| Female | 27 | 22.3 |
| T stage | ||
| T1-2 | 36 | 29.8 |
| T3-4 | 85 | 70.2 |
| N stage | ||
| N0-1 | 23 | 19.0 |
| N2-3 | 98 | 81.0 |
| Overall stage | ||
| III | 88 | 72.7 |
| IVA | 33 | 27.3 |
| EBV DNA, copy/mL | ||
| < 4000 | 81 | 66.9 |
| ≥ 4000 | 40 | 33.1 |
| LDH, U/L | ||
| < 245 | 105 | 86.8 |
| ≥ 245 | 16 | 13.2 |
Abbreviations: LANPC, locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma; SUVmax-PT, maximum standardized uptake value from the primary tumor site; TLG-PT, total lesion glycolysis from the primary tumor site; NAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy; GP, gemcitabine with cisplatin; TP, docetaxel with cisplatin; PF, fluorouracil with cisplatin; TPF, docetaxel plus cisplatin with fluorouracil; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase.
Univariate Analysis of Prognostic Factors for NAC Response
| Characteristic | HR (95% CI for HR) | |
|---|---|---|
| SUVmax-PT | <0.001 | |
| < 11.8 | Reference | |
| ≥ 11.8 | 5.94 (2.24, 15.76) | |
| TLG-PT | <0.001 | |
| < 38.5 | Reference | |
| ≥ 38.5 | 5.52 (2.02, 15.12) | |
| NAC regimen | 0.007 | |
| GP | Reference | |
| TP/PF | 1.30 (0.53, 3.21) | |
| TPF | 0.00 (0.00, Inf) | |
| Age, years | 0.149 | |
| < 50 | Reference | |
| ≥ 50 | 0.52 (0.21, 1.29) | |
| Gender | 0.142 | |
| Male | Reference | |
| Female | 0.41 (0.11, 1.49) | |
| Overall stage | 0.677 | |
| III | Reference | |
| IVA | 0.81 (0.29, 2.24) | |
| EBV DNA, copy/mL | 0.107 | |
| < 4000 | Reference | |
| ≥ 4000 | 0.44 (0.15, 1.26) | |
| LDH, U/L | 0.003 | |
| < 245 | Reference | |
| ≥ 245 | 2.72 (1.07, 8.39) |
Abbreviations: 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; SUVmax-PT, maximum standardized uptake value from the primary tumor site; TLG-PT, total lesion glycolysis from the primary tumor site; NAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy; GP, gemcitabine with cisplatin; TP, docetaxel with cisplatin; PF, fluorouracil with cisplatin; TPF, docetaxel plus cisplatin with fluorouracil; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase.
Multivariate Analysis of Prognostic Factors for NAC Response
| Characteristic | HR (95% CI for HR) | |
|---|---|---|
| SUVmax-PT (< 11.8 vs ≥ 11.8) | 3.49 (1.17, 10.36) | 0.024 |
| TLG-PT (< 38.5 vs ≥ 38.5) | 4.45 (1.44, 13.78) | 0.010 |
| LDH, U/L (< 245 vs ≥ 245) | 1.83 (1.15, 5.34) | 0.048 |
| Chemotherapy regimen (GP vs TP/PF vs TPF) | 1.30 (0.53, 3.21) | 0.830 |
Abbreviations: NAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; SUVmax-PT, maximum standardized uptake value from the primary tumor site; TLG-PT, total lesion glycolysis from the primary tumor site; GP, gemcitabine with cisplatin; TP, docetaxel with cisplatin; PF, fluorouracil with cisplatin; TPF, docetaxel plus cisplatin with fluorouracil; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase.
Figure 2Prognostic grouping by recursive partitioning analysis in patients with LANPC for predicting NAC response.
Figure 3Nomogram (A) to predict NAC response in LANPC. Calibration curves for the nomogram to calculate NAC response with the training cohort (B) and with an internal validation cohort (C).