| Literature DB >> 35010352 |
Kisoo Pahk1, Ki-Jin Ryu2, Chanmin Joung3, Hyun Woo Kwon1, Sanghoon Lee2, Hyuntae Park2, Tak Kim2, Jae Yun Song2, Sungeun Kim1.
Abstract
Obesity contributes to increased cancer incidence and aggressiveness in patients with endometrial cancer. Inflamed metabolic activity of visceral adipose tissue (VAT) is regarded as a key underlying mechanism of adverse consequences of obesity. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between inflammatory metabolic activity of VAT evaluated by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) and metastatic status of lymph nodes (LN) in patients with endometrial cancer. In total, 161 women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer, who received preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT, were enrolled. VAT inflammatory metabolic activity was defined as V/S ratio and measured from the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of VAT normalized to the SUVmax of subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT). The positive LN metastasis group exhibited a significantly higher V/S ratio than the negative LN metastasis group. Systemic inflammatory surrogate markers including high sensitivity C-reactive protein, spleen SUVmax, and bone marrow SUVmax were also higher in the LN metastasis group than in the negative LN metastasis group, showing significant correlations with V/S ratio. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, V/S ratio was independently associated with LN metastasis. V/S ratio is independently associated with the LN metastasis status in patients with endometrial cancer. This finding could be useful as a potential surrogate marker of obesity-induced VAT inflammation associated with tumor aggressiveness.Entities:
Keywords: endometrial cancer; inflammation; metastasis; obesity; positron-emission tomography; visceral fat
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35010352 PMCID: PMC8751038 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19010092
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Flow chart showing the study design. 18F-FDG PET/CT: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography; KUAH: Korea University Anam Hospital.
Patient characteristics.
| N (−) | N (+) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| No. of patients | 137 | 24 | |
| Age (years) | 55.4 ± 11.5 | 60.3 ± 7.5 | 0.047 * |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26.5 ± 4.8 | 25.1 ± 3.3 | 0.316 |
| Menopause, n (%) | 0.161 | ||
| None | 50 (36.5) | 6 (25) | |
| Yes | 87 (63.5) | 18 (75) | |
| HTN, n (%) | 0.981 | ||
| None | 91 (66.4) | 16 (66.7) | |
| Yes | 46 (33.6) | 8 (33.3) | |
| DM, n (%) | 1 | ||
| None | 116 (84.7) | 21 (87.5) | |
| Yes | 21 (15.3) | 3 (12.5) | |
| Histology, n (%) | <0.001 * | ||
| Endometrioid-origin | 116 (84.7) | 12 (50) | |
| Other | 21 (15.3) | 12 (50) | |
| Histologic grade, n (%) | <0.001 * | ||
| 1 | 75 (54.7) | 4 (16.7) | |
| 2 | 38 (27.7) | 5 (20.8) | |
| 3 | 24 (17.6) | 15 (62.5) | |
| Tumor size (cm) | 4.5 ± 2.9 | 7.1 ± 3.7 | <0.001 * |
| FIGO stage, n (%) | <0.001 * | ||
| 1 | 112 (81.8) | 1 (4.2) | |
| 2 | 15 (10.9) | 3 (12.5) | |
| 3 | 9 (6.6) | 15 (62.5) | |
| 4 | 1 (0.7) | 5 (20.8) | |
| Ovary/salphinx involvement, n (%) | 0.001 * | ||
| None | 126 (92) | 15 (62.5) | |
| Yes | 11 (8) | 9 (37.5) | |
| Lymphovascular invasion, n (%) | <0.001 * | ||
| None | 115 (83.9) | 10 (41.7) | |
| Yes | 22 (16.1) | 14 (58.3) | |
| hsCRP, mg/dL | 5.1 ± 14.7 | 6.6 ± 9.5 | 0.0083 * |
| Spleen SUVmax | 2.07 ± 0.34 | 2.26 ± 0.46 | 0.01 * |
| BM SUVmax | 1.82 ± 0.38 | 2.27 ± 0.77 | 0.02 * |
| CEA, ng/mL | 1.38 ± 1.46 | 3.14 ± 6.46 | 0.0178 * |
| CA 19-9, U/mL | 86.37 ± 467 | 291.76 ± 543.16 | 0.0019 * |
| CA 125, U/mL | 31.83 ± 116.18 | 164.57 ± 459.91 | <0.001 * |
N (−) negative lymph node metastasis, N (+) positive lymph node metastasis, BMI body mass index, HTN hypertension, DM diabetes mellitus, FIGO International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, hsCRP high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, SUVmax maximum standardized uptake value, BM bone marrow, CEA carcinoembryonic antigen, CA 19-9 carbohydrate antigen 19-9, CA 125 carbohydrate antigen 125. * Statistically significant difference.
Figure 2Representative 18F-FDG PET/CT images of visceral adipose tissue (VAT) metabolic activity according to lymph node (LN) metastasis status (A) and its corresponding magnified images of VAT (B). N (−): negative LN metastasis, N (+): positive LN metastasis, 18F-FDG: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, PET: positron emission tomography, CT: computed tomography.
Figure 3Comparison of: (A) VAT SUVmax, (B) SAT SUVmax, and (C) V/S ratio according to LN metastasis status in patients with endometrial cancer. (D) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for the prediction of LN metastasis. N (−), n = 137; N (+), n = 24. SUVmax: standardized uptake value, SAT: subcutaneous adipose tissue, V/S ratio: VAT SUVmax/SAT SUVmax, * statistically significant difference.
Spearman correlation analysis.
| VAT SUVmax | SAT SUVmax | V/S Ratio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| r | p | r | p | r | p | |
| Spleen SUVmax | 0.198 | 0.012 * | 0.142 | 0.072 | 0.158 | 0.046 * |
| BM SUVmax | 0.253 | 0.001 * | 0.072 | 0.367 | 0.226 | 0.004 * |
| hsCRP | 0.341 | <0.001 * | 0.148 | 0.079 | 0.211 | 0.012 * |
VAT visceral adipose tissue, SAT subcutaneous adipose tissue, SUVmax maximum standardized uptake value, V/S ratio VAT SUVmax/SAT SUVmax, BM bone marrow, hsCRP high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. * Statistically significant difference.
Uni- and multivariate analyses for prediction of lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer.
| Univariate | Multivariate | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | OR (95% CI) |
| OR (95% CI) |
|
| Age (Continuous) | 1.043 (1–1.088) | 0.05 | ||
| BMI (Continuous) | 0.927 (0.834–1.031) | 0.162 | ||
| Menopause (None vs. Yes) | 2.093 (0.732–5.983) | 0.168 | ||
| HTN (None vs. Yes) | 0.989 (0.394–2.481) | 0.981 | ||
| DM (None vs. Yes) | 0.789 (0.216–2.884) | 0.72 | ||
| Histology (Non-endometrioid vs. Endometrioid) | 0.181 (0.072–0.457) | <0.001 * | 0.696 (0.138–3.502) | 0.66 |
| Histologic grade (1 and 2 vs. 3) | 7.708 (3.021–19.67) | <0.001 * | 2.714 (0.545–13.51) | 0.223 |
| Tumor size (Continuous) | 1.236 (1.075–1.421) | 0.003 * | 1.11 (0.884–1.394) | 0.367 |
| Lymphovascular invasion (None vs. Yes) | 7.127 (2.808–18.089) | <0.001 * | 1.405 (0.289–6.831) | 0.674 |
| Ovary/salphinx involvement (None vs. Yes) | 6.6 (2.353–18.514) | <0.001 * | 3.263 (0.615–17.327) | 0.165 |
| V/S ratio (≤1.56 vs. >1.56) | 28.615 (9.656–84.799) | <0.001 * | 23.2 (5.318–101.211) | <0.001 * |
| CEA (Continuous) | 1.179 (0.978–1.421) | 0.085 | ||
| CA 19-9 (Continuous) | 1 (1–1.001) | 0.229 | ||
| CA 125 (Continuous) | 1.002 (1–1.004) | 0.061 | ||
OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, BMI body mass index, HTN hypertension, DM diabetes mellitus, V/S ratio VAT SUVmax/SAT SUVmax, CEA carcinoembryonic antigen, CA 19-9 carbohydrate antigen 19-9, CA 125 carbohydrate antigen 125. * Statistically significant difference.