» Articles » PMID: 28299585

Serial Imaging Using [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography and Histopathologic Assessment in Predicting Survival in a Population of Surgically Resectable Distal Oesophageal and Gastric Adenocarcinoma Following Neoadjuvant Therapy

Overview
Journal Ann Nucl Med
Date 2017 Mar 17
PMID 28299585
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background And Objectives: We retrospectively evaluated the value of PET/CT in predicting survival and histopathological tumour-response in patients with distal oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant treatment.

Methods: Twenty-one patients with resectable distal oesophageal adenocarcinoma and 14 with gastric adenocarcinoma between January 2002 and December 2011, who had undergone serial PET before and after neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery, were enrolled. Maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) and metabolic tumour volume were measured and correlated with tumour regression grade and survival.

Results: Histopathological tumour response (PR) is a stronger predictor of overall and disease-free survival compared to metabolic response. ∆%SUVmax ≥70% was the only PET metric that predicted PR (82.4% sensitivity, 61.5% specificity, p = 0.047). Histopathological non-responders had a higher risk of death (HR 8.461, p = 0.001) and recurrence (HR 6.385, p = 0.002) and similarly in metabolic non-responders for death (HR 2.956, p = 0.063) and recurrence (HR 3.614, p = 0.028). Ordinalised ∆%SUVmax showed a predictive trend for OS and DFS, but failed to achieve statistical significance.

Conclusions: PR was a stronger predictor of survival than metabolic response. ∆%SUVmax ≥70% was the best biomarker on PET that predicted PR and survival in oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma. Ordinalisation of ∆%SUVmax was not helpful in predicting primary outcomes.

Citing Articles

The prognostic value of pretreatment [F]FDG PET/CT parameters in esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Huang M, Wang W, Wang R, Tian R Eur Radiol. 2024; .

PMID: 39570366 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-024-11207-3.


Systemic immune-inflammation index as a useful prognostic indicator predicts survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Chen L, Yan Y, Zhu L, Cong X, Li S, Song S Cancer Manag Res. 2017; 9:849-867.

PMID: 29276407 PMC: 5733921. DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S151026.


Peripheral venous blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Chen L, Zuo Y, Zhu L, Zhang Y, Li S, Ma F Onco Targets Ther. 2017; 10:2569-2580.

PMID: 28553122 PMC: 5440079. DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S134716.

References
1.
Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, Naehrig J, Rutke S, Weber W . Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23(30):7445-53. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.965. View

2.
Vallbohmer D, Holscher A, Schneider P, Schmidt M, Dietlein M, Bollschweiler E . [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography for the assessment of histopathologic response and prognosis after completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2010; 102(2):135-40. DOI: 10.1002/jso.21592. View

3.
Konski A, Cheng J, Goldberg M, Li T, Maurer A, Yu J . Correlation of molecular response as measured by 18-FDG positron emission tomography with outcome after chemoradiotherapy in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 69(2):358-63. PMC: 2933372. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.03.053. View

4.
Kato H, Takita J, Miyazaki T, Nakajima M, Fukai Y, Masuda N . Correlation of 18-F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) accumulation with glucose transporter (Glut-1) expression in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Anticancer Res. 2003; 23(4):3263-72. View

5.
Kostakoglu L, Coleman M, Leonard J, Kuji I, Zoe H, Goldsmith S . PET predicts prognosis after 1 cycle of chemotherapy in aggressive lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease. J Nucl Med. 2002; 43(8):1018-27. View