1818F-FDG-PET evaluation of pathological tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with NSCLC

Nuclear Medicine Communications

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 71-77

  Zhang, Chenpeng ^a   Liu, Jianjun ^a   Tong, Jinlu ^a   Sun, Xiaoguang ^a   Song, Shaoli ^a   Huang, Gang ^a,b  

^a SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (China)

^b SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (China)

Author keywords

Lung cancer; Meta analysis; Neoadjuvant treatment; Non small cell lung cancer; Positron emission tomography; Predicting response

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ARTICLE; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE; ADJUVANT THERAPY; ANIMAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; LUNG TUMOR; SCINTISCANNING; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANIMALS; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; NEOADJUVANT THERAPY; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84870948980     PISSN: 01433636     EISSN: 14735628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283599999     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Juretic A, Sobat H, Samija M. Combined modality therapy of non-small cell lung cancers. Ann Oncol 1999; 10 (Suppl 6):93-98.
2. Vansteenkiste J, Fischer BM, Dooms C, Mortensen J. Positron-emission tomography in prognostic and therapeutic assessment of lung cancer: systematic review. Lancet Oncol 2004; 5:531-540.
3. de Geus-Oei LF, van der Heijden HF, Corstens FH, Oyen WJ. Predictive and prognostic value of FDG-PET in nonsmall-cell lung cancer: a systematic review. Cancer 2007; 110:1654-1664.
4. Rebollo-Aguirre AC, Ramos-Font C, Villegas Portero R, Cook GJ, Llamas Elvira JM, Romero Tabares A. Is FDG-PET suitable for evaluating neoadjuvant therapy in non-small cell lung cancer? Evidence with systematic review of the literature. J Surg Oncol 2010; 101:486-494.
5. Hoekstra CJ, Stroobants SG, Smit EF, Vansteenkiste J, van Tinteren H, Postmus PE, et al. Prognostic relevance of response evaluation using [18F]- 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:8362-8370.
6. De Leyn P, Stroobants S, De Wever W, Lerut T, Coosemans W, Decker G, et al. Prospective comparative study of integrated positron emission tomography-computed tomography scan compared with remediastinoscopy in the assessment of residual mediastinal lymph node disease after induction chemotherapy for mediastinoscopy-proven stage IIIA-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a Leuven Lung Cancer Group Study. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3333-3339.
7. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Ojha B. Restaging patients with N2 (stage IIIa) non-small cell lung cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a prospective study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006; 131:1229-1235.
8. Zhang C, Chen Y, Xue H, Zheng P, Tong J, Liu J, et al. Diagnostic value of FDG-PET in recurrent colorectal carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 2009; 124:167-173.
9. Kwee RM. Prediction of tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal cancer with use of 18F-FDG PET: a systematic review. Radiology 2010; 254:707-717.
10. Compton CC, Fielding LP, Burgart LJ, Conley B, Cooper HS, Hamilton SR, et al. Prognostic factors in colorectal cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2000; 124:979-994.
11. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003; 3:25.
12. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003; 327:557-560.
13. Deville WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, Montori VM, de Vet HC, van der Windt DA, Bezemer PD. Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol 2002; 2:9.
14. Zamora J, Abraira V, Muriel A, Khan K, Coomarasamy A. Meta-DiSc: a software for meta-analysis of test accuracy data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6:31.
15. Eschmann SM, Friedel G, Paulsen F, Reimold M, Hehr T, Budach W, et al. Repeat 18F-FDG PET for monitoring neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2007; 55:165-171.
16. Yamamoto Y, Nishiyama Y, Monden T, Sasakawa Y, Ohkawa M, Gotoh M, et al. Correlation of FDG-PET findings with histopathology in the assessment of response to induction chemoradiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33:140-147.
17. Stigt JA, Oostdijk AH, Timmer PR, Shahin GM, Boers JE, Groen HJ. Comparison of EUS-guided fine needle aspiration and integrated PET-CT in restaging after treatment for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2009; 66:198-204.
18. Shiraishi K, Nomori H, Ohba Y, Kaji M, Mori T, Shibata H, Oya N, Sasaki J. Repeat FDG-PET for predicting pathological tumor response and prognosis after neoadjuvant treatment in nonsmall cell lung cancer: comparison with computed tomography. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010; 16: 394-400.
19. Ryu JS, Choi NC, Fischman AJ, Lynch TJ, Mathisen DJ. FDG-PET in staging and restaging non-small cell lung cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: correlation with histopathology. Lung Cancer 2002; 35:179-187.
20. Pottgen C, Levegrun S, Theegarten D, Marnitz S, Grehl S, Pink R, et al. Value of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer for prediction of pathologic response and times to relapse after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2006; 12:97-106.
21. Port JL, Kent MS, Korst RJ, Keresztes R, Levin MA, Altorki NK. Positron emission tomography scanning poorly predicts response to preoperative chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 77:254-259, discussion 259.
22. Ohtsuka T, Nomori H, Ebihara A, Watanabe K, Kaji M, Naruke T, et al. FDG-PET imaging for lymph node staging and pathologic tumor response after neoadjuvant treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006; 12:89-94.
23. Lee HY, Lee HJ, Kim YT, Kang CH, Jang BG, Chung DH, et al. Value of combined interpretation of computed tomography response and positron emission tomography response for prediction of prognosis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2010; 5:497-503.
24. Hellwig D, Graeter TP, Ukena D, Georg T, Kirsch CM, Schafers HJ. Value of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography after induction therapy of locally advanced bronchogenic carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004; 128:892-899.
25. Eschmann SM, Friedel G, Paulsen F, Reimold M, Hehr T, Budach W, et al. 18F-FDG PET for assessment of therapy response and preoperative re-evaluation after neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy in stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007; 34:463-471.
26. Choi NC, Fischman AJ, Niemierko A, Ryu JS, Lynch T, Wain J, et al. Doseresponse relationship between probability of pathologic tumor control and glucose metabolic rate measured with FDG PET after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 54:1024-1035.
27. Cerfolio RJ, Ojha B, Mukherjee S, Pask AH, Bass CS, Katholi CR. Positron emission tomography scanning with 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose as a predictor of response of neoadjuvant treatment for non-small cell carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003; 125:938-944.
28. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Winokur TS, Ohja B, Bartolucci AA. Repeat FDG-PET after neoadjuvant therapy is a predictor of pathologic response in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 78:1903-1909, discussion 1909.
29. Tsuchida Y, Therasse P. Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST): new guidelines. Med Pediatr Oncol 2001; 37:1-3.
30. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:205-216.
31. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981; 47:207-214.
32. Higashi K, Clavo AC, Wahl RL. Does FDG uptake measure proliferative activity of human cancer cells? In vitro comparison with DNA flow cytometry and tritiated thymidine uptake. J Nucl Med 1993; 34:414-419.
33. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD Initiative. Radiology 2003; 226:24-28.
34. Bossuyt PM. STARD statement: still room for improvement in the reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology 2008; 248:713-714.
35. Zhang C, Tong J, Sun X, Liu J, Wang Y, Huang G. (18)F-FDG-PET evaluation of treatment response to neo-adjuvant therapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 2012 [Epub ahead of print].