The Predictive Value of Baseline Volumetric PET/CT Parameters on Treatment Response and Prognosis in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.


Journal

Journal of gastrointestinal cancer
ISSN: 1941-6636
Titre abrégé: J Gastrointest Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101479627

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Historique:
accepted: 07 02 2021
pubmed: 3 3 2021
medline: 10 6 2022
entrez: 2 3 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To investigate the prognostic effects of baseline volumetric PET/CT parameters including the maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and tumor lesion glycolysis (TLG) on treatment response and prognosis in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT). Between 2015 and 2018, 51 patients with LARC treated with NACRT followed by surgery were included in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into 2 groups by tumor regression grade (TRG) as follows: group I = TRG 1 (no detectable cancer cells) + TRG 2 (single cells and/or small groups of cancer cells) and group II = TRG3 (residual tumor outgrown by fibrosis) + TRG 4 (remarkable fibrosis outgrown by tumor cells) + TRG 5 (no fibrosis with extensive residual cancer). Of the 51 patients, 34 (66.7%) were male. The median age was 55 (range, 37-78) years. According to TRG status, 14 (27.4%) patients were in group I and 37 (72.6%) patients were in group II. The area under the curve (95% CI) was 0.749 (0.593-0.905) in the ROC curve plotted for MTV. The cut-off value for MTV was 12, with 70% sensitivity and 65% specificity. MTV was ≥ 12 in 32 (62.8%) patients. MTV and TLG values were significantly different between groups I and II, whereas there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of SUVmax values (p = 0.006, p = 0.033, and p = 0.673, respectively). The disease-free survival was not reached in patients with MTV < 12 vs. 20 months in those with MTV ≥ 12 (p = 0.323). In multivariate analysis, MTV (OR, 95% Cl, 5.00 [1.17-21.383]) was found to be the factor that affected pathological complete response. In LARC treated with NACRT, MTV prior to treatment can help predict the response to treatment.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33651265
doi: 10.1007/s12029-021-00608-y
pii: 10.1007/s12029-021-00608-y
doi:

Substances chimiques

Radiopharmaceuticals 0
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 0Z5B2CJX4D

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

341-347

Informations de copyright

© 2021. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Références

Edge SB, Compton CC. The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1471–4.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-010-0985-4
Heald RJ. The “Holy Plane” of rectal surgery. J R Soc Med. 1988;81:503–8.
doi: 10.1177/014107688808100904
Li Y, Wang J, Ma X, et al. A review of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Int J Biol Sci. 2016;12:1022–31.
doi: 10.7150/ijbs.15438
Martin ST, Heneghan HM, Winter DC. Systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes following pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2012;99:918–28.
doi: 10.1002/bjs.8702
Bujko K, Kolodziejczyk M, Nasierowska-Guttmejer A, et al. Tumour regression grading in patients with residual rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiation. Radiother Oncol. 2010;95:298–302.
doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2010.04.005
Topova L, Hellmich G, Puffer E, et al. Prognostic value of tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy in rectal carcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54:401–11.
doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3182070efb
Shivnani AT, Small W Jr, Stryker SJ, et al. Preoperative chemoradiation for rectal cancer: results of multimodality management and analysis of prognostic factors. Am J Surg. 2007;193:389–93.
doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2006.09.030
Habr-Gama A, Perez RO, Nadalin W, et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment for stage 0 distal rectal cancer following chemoradiation therapy: long-term results. Ann Surg. 2004;240:711–7.
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000141194.27992.32
Maas M, Nelemans PJ, Valentini V, et al. Long-term outcome in patients with a pathological complete response after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:835–44.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70172-8
Sakin A, Sahin S, Sengul Samanci N, et al.  The impact of tumor regression grade on long-term survival in locally advanced rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020;1078155219900944.
Paun BC, Cassie S, MacLean AR, et al. Postoperative complications following surgery for rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2010;251:807–18.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181dae4ed
van der Valk MJM, Hilling DE, Bastiaannet E, et al. Long-term outcomes of clinical complete responders after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer in the International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD): an international multicentre registry study. Lancet. 2018;391:2537–45.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31078-X
Appelt AL, Ploen J, Harling H, et al. High-dose chemoradiotherapy and watchful waiting for distal rectal cancer: a prospective observational study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:919–27.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00120-5
Rombouts AJM, Al-Najami I, Abbott NL, et al. Can we Save the rectum by watchful waiting or TransAnal microsurgery following (chemo) Radiotherapy versus Total mesorectal excision for early REctal Cancer (STAR-TREC study)?: protocol for a multicentre, randomised feasibility study. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e019474.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019474
Gallamini A, Zwarthoed C, Borra A. Positron emission tomography (PET) in oncology. Cancers (Basel). 2014;6:1821–89.
doi: 10.3390/cancers6041821
Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:328–54.
doi: 10.1007/s00259-014-2961-x
Liao S, Penney BC, Wroblewski K, et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden on 18F-FDG PET in nonsurgical patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:27–38.
doi: 10.1007/s00259-011-1934-6
Song BI, Kim HW, Won KS, et al. Preoperative standardized uptake value of metastatic lymph nodes measured by 18F-FDG PET/CT improves the prediction of prognosis in gastric cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94:e1037.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001037
Arici S, Karyagar SS, Karyagar S, et al. The predictive role of metabolic tumor volume on no response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2020,1078155219898504.
Husby JA, Reitan BC, Biermann M, et al. Metabolic tumor volume on 18F-FDG PET/CT improves preoperative identification of high-risk endometrial carcinoma patients. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1191–8.
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.115.159913
Li QW, Zheng RL, Ling YH, et al. Prediction of tumor response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer using (18)fluorine-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography and serum carcinoembryonic antigen: a prospective study. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016;41:1448–55.
doi: 10.1007/s00261-016-0698-7
Pellegrino S, Fonti R, Mazziotti E, et al. Total metabolic tumor volume by 18F-FDG PET/CT for the prediction of outcome in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2019;33:937–44.
doi: 10.1007/s12149-019-01407-z
Ryan R, Gibbons D, Hyland JM, et al. Pathological response following long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Histopathology. 2005;47:141–6.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2005.02176.x
Chen CC, Lee RC, Lin JK, et al. How accurate is magnetic resonance imaging in restaging rectal cancer in patients receiving preoperative combined chemoradiotherapy? Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48:722–8.
doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-0851-1
Rau B, Hunerbein M, Barth C, et al. Accuracy of endorectal ultrasound after preoperative radiochemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 1999;13:980–4.
doi: 10.1007/s004649901151
Calvo FA, Domper M, Matute R, et al. 18F-FDG positron emission tomography staging and restaging in rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:528–35.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.09.058
Mac Manus MP, Hicks RJ, Matthews JP, et al. Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography scanning for response-assessment after radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1285–92.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.07.054
Martoni AA, Zamagni C, Quercia S, et al. Early (18)F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography may identify a subset of patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer who will not respond optimally to preoperative chemotherapy. Cancer. 2010;116:805–13.
doi: 10.1002/cncr.24820
Gauthe M, Richard-Molard M, Fayard J, et al. Prognostic impact of tumour burden assessed by metabolic tumour volume on FDG PET/CT in anal canal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:63–70.
doi: 10.1007/s00259-016-3475-5
Lee SJ, Kim JG, Lee SW, et al. Clinical implications of initial FDG-PET/CT in locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2013;71:1201–7.
doi: 10.1007/s00280-013-2114-0
Jo HJ, Kim SJ, Lee HY, et al. Prediction of survival and cancer recurrence using metabolic volumetric parameters measured by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with surgically resected rectal cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2014;39:493–7.
doi: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000438
Jo HJ, Kim SJ, Kim IJ, et al. Predictive value of volumetric parameters measured by F-18 FDG PET/CT for lymph node status in patients with surgically resected rectal cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2014;28:196–202.
doi: 10.1007/s12149-014-0809-x
Kim SH, Song BI, Kim BW, et al. Predictive value of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT for lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer. Sci Rep. 2019;9:4979.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-41422-8
Beddy D, Hyland JM, Winter DC, et al. A simplified tumor regression grade correlates with survival in locally advanced rectal carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:3471–7.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-008-0149-y

Auteurs

Abdullah Sakin (A)

Department of Medical Oncology, Yuzuncu Yil University Medical School, 65030, Van, Turkey. drsakin@hotmail.com.

Suleyman Sahin (S)

Department of Medical Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Van Training and Research Hospital, Van, Turkey.

Sevda Saglampınar Karyagar (SS)

Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Prof. Dr Cemil, Tascıoglu City Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.

Savas Karyagar (S)

Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Prof. Dr Cemil, Tascıoglu City Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.

Mustafa Atci (M)

Department of Medical Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Prof. Dr Cemil, Tascıoglu City Hospital, 34384, Istanbul, Turkey.

Mustafa Halil Akboru (MH)

Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Prof. Dr Cemil, Tascıoglu City Hospital, 34384, Istanbul, Turkey.

Sener Cihan (S)

Department of Medical Oncology, University of Health Sciences, Prof. Dr Cemil, Tascıoglu City Hospital, 34384, Istanbul, Turkey.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH