Prognostic and Predictive Role of [ F]fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (FDG-PET) in Patients with Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) Treated with Up-front Pemetrexed-based Chemotherapy
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of metabolic parameters analyzed at baseline and at interim FDG-PET in predicting disease outcome in unresectable MPM patients receiving pemetrexed-based chemotherapy. A consecutive series of MPM patients treated between February 2004 and July 2013 with first-line pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, and evaluated by FDG-PET and CT scan at baseline and after two cycles of chemotherapy, was reviewed. Best CT scan response was assessed according to modified RECIST criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were correlated with FDG-PET parameters, such as maximum standardized uptake value (SUV ), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), and percentage changes in SUV (∆SUV) and TLG (∆TLG). Overall, 142 patients were enrolled; 77 (54%) received talc pleurodesis before chemotherapy. Baseline SUV and TLG showed a statistically significant correlation with PFS and OS (P < 0.05) in both group of patients (treated and untreated with pleurodesis). In 65 patients not receiving pleurodesis, SUV reduction ≥25% (∆SUV ≥ 25%) and TLG reduction ≥30% (∆TLG ≥ 30%) were significantly associated with longer PFS (P < 0.05). Patients showing both ∆SUV ≥ 25% and ∆TLG ≥ 30% responses had a significant reduction in the risk of disease progression (HR:0.31, P < 0.001) and death (HR:0.52, P = 0.044). Neither ∆SUV nor ∆TLG showed similar association with survival outcomes in patients treated with pleurodesis. Our study confirmed the prognostic role of baseline FDG-PET in a large series of MPM patients treated with first-line pemetrexed-based chemotherapy. Moreover, use of ∆SUV ≥ 25% and ∆TLG ≥ 30% as cut-off values to define early metabolic response supported the role of FDG-PET in predicting disease outcome and treatment response in patients not receiving pleurodesis.
Taralli S, Giancipoli R, Caldarella C, Scolozzi V, Ricciardi S, Cardillo G J Clin Med. 2022; 11(1).
PMID: 35011772 PMC: 8745748. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11010033.
Yenigun B, Kahya Y, Soydal C, Ata Tutkun N, Kocaman G, Kocak E Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Derg. 2021; 29(1):92-100.
PMID: 33768986 PMC: 7970077. DOI: 10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2021.20432.
Aide N, Fauchille P, Coquan E, Ferron G, Combe P, Meunier J Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020; 48(6):1998-2008.
PMID: 33221969 PMC: 8113167. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-05092-3.
Does size matter? -a population-based analysis of malignant pleural mesothelioma.
He J, Xu S, Pan H, Li S, He J Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020; 9(4):1041-1052.
PMID: 32953483 PMC: 7481612. DOI: 10.21037/tlcr-19-488.
PET/CT-Based Response Evaluation in Cancer-a Systematic Review of Design Issues.
Gerke O, Ehlers K, Motschall E, Hoilund-Carlsen P, Vach W Mol Imaging Biol. 2019; 22(1):33-46.
PMID: 31016638 DOI: 10.1007/s11307-019-01351-4.