» Articles » PMID: 33525712

Dual Tracer 68Ga-DOTATOC and 18F-FDG PET Improve Preoperative Evaluation of Aggressiveness in Resectable Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms

Abstract

Purpose: To define an imaging risk profile in a population of patients affected by Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNENs) candidates to surgery, by assessing the predictive role of 68Ga-DOTATOC and 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MR derived parameters in risk stratification, particularly regarding histological features of aggressive behaviour.

Patients And Methods: Retrospective study including 83 patients (53 males, 30 females; median age: 60 years, interquartile range 52-66.5), who underwent to 68Ga-DOTATOC (PET/CT: = 77; PET/MR: = 6) and, 68/83 patients, also to 18F-FDG PET (PET/CT: = 65; PET/MR: = 3) before surgery for PanNEN between 2011 and 2019, with available histological and follow-up data. The PET scans were interpreted with both qualitative (positive vs. negative) and semiquantitative measurements as follows: maximum and mean standardized uptake value (SUVmax and SUVmean) for both 18F-FDG and 68Ga-DOTATOC scans, metabolic tumour volume (MTV) and tumour lesion glycolysis (TLG) for 18F-FDG scans and somatostatin receptor density (SRD) and total lesion somatostatin receptor density (TLSRD) for 68Ga-DOTATOC PET. Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was used to investigate the performance of several PET parameters in predicting tumour stage or characteristic. For each PET parameter, the optimal cut-off was derived. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess if the PET parameters, categorized with the optimal cut-off values, were able to predict significantly the corresponding tumour stage or characteristic.

Results: Overall, 29 (35%) patients had G1, 49 (59%) a G2 and five (6%) had a G3 PanNEN. The median Ki-67 index was 4% (interquartile range: 1-8%). SRD and TLSRD significantly discriminated between pT3 or pT4 PanNEN versus pT1 or pT2, as well as 18F-FDG MTV and TLG. 68Ga-DOTATOC SUVmax was able to significantly predict the presence of distant metastases with a threshold of 51.27 (sensitivity and specificity of 85.7 and 68.1%, respectively). 18F-FDG MTV and TLG were predictors of angioinvasion. The cut-off threshold for MTV was 7.98 (sensitivity and specificity of 69.7 and 82.4%, respectively) ( = 0.0004) whereas the cut-off for TLG was 32.4 (sensitivity and specificity of 69.7% and 82.4%, respectively) ( = 0.0004).

Conclusion: Dual tracer 68Ga-DOTATOC and 18F-FDG PET scans provide relevant information regarding tumour behaviour and aggressiveness, implementing the diagnostic preoperative work-up.

Citing Articles

Predictive value of 68[Ga]Ga-DOTA-TATE PET/CT volumetric parameters in assessing treatment response to long-acting somatostatin analogues in patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumours.

Morawiec-Slawek K, Opalinska M, Lenda-Tracz W, Sitarz K, Kurzynska A, Stefanska A EJNMMI Res. 2024; 14(1):105.

PMID: 39538103 PMC: 11561214. DOI: 10.1186/s13550-024-01169-4.


Preoperative assessment of lymph nodal metastases with [Ga]Ga-DOTATOC PET radiomics for improved surgical planning in well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours.

Mapelli P, Bezzi C, Muffatti F, Ghezzo S, Canevari C, Magnani P Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2024; 51(9):2774-2783.

PMID: 38696129 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-024-06730-w.


[F]FDG PET/CT-Avid Discordant Volume as a Biomarker in Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Multicenter Study.

Chan D, Hayes A, Karfis I, Conner A, Mileva M, Bernard E J Nucl Med. 2024; 65(2):185-191.

PMID: 38164579 PMC: 10858377. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.266346.


Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor (Pan-NET) Presented by Abdominal Pain: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Regolo M, Cardaci N, Salmeri C, Laudani A, Colaci M, Ippolito M J Clin Med. 2023; 12(20).

PMID: 37892755 PMC: 10607714. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12206617.


Preoperative prediction of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor grade based on Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT.

Ma J, Wang X, Tang M, Zhang C Endocrine. 2023; 83(2):502-510.

PMID: 37715934 PMC: 10850018. DOI: 10.1007/s12020-023-03515-3.


References
1.
Nagtegaal I, Odze R, Klimstra D, Paradis V, Rugge M, Schirmacher P . The 2019 WHO classification of tumours of the digestive system. Histopathology. 2019; 76(2):182-188. PMC: 7003895. DOI: 10.1111/his.13975. View

2.
Falconi M, Bartsch D, Eriksson B, Kloppel G, Lopes J, OConnor J . ENETS Consensus Guidelines for the management of patients with digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms of the digestive system: well-differentiated pancreatic non-functioning tumors. Neuroendocrinology. 2012; 95(2):120-34. DOI: 10.1159/000335587. View

3.
Cingarlini S, Ortolani S, Salgarello M, Butturini G, Malpaga A, Malfatti V . Role of Combined 68Ga-DOTATOC and 18F-FDG Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Diagnostic Workup of Pancreas Neuroendocrine Tumors: Implications for Managing Surgical Decisions. Pancreas. 2016; 46(1):42-47. DOI: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000745. View

4.
Garin E, Le Jeune F, Devillers A, Cuggia M, de Lajarte-Thirouard A, Bouriel C . Predictive value of 18F-FDG PET and somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in patients with metastatic endocrine tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50(6):858-64. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.057505. View

5.
Bu J, Youn S, Kwon W, Jang K, Han S, Han S . Prognostic factors of non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor revisited: The value of WHO 2010 classification. Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2018; 22(1):66-74. PMC: 5845613. DOI: 10.14701/ahbps.2018.22.1.66. View