Quantitative PET factors predictive of the response to therapy in solid tumors: Which is the best?

Clinical Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 160-163

  Maffione, Anna Margherita ^a   Grassetto, Gaia ^a   Chondrogiannis, Sotirios ^a   Colletti, Patrick M ^b   Rubello, Domenico ^a  

^a Santa Maria Misericordia Hospital   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; NOTE; PET SCANNER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; QUANTITATIVE ASSAY; SOLID TUMOR; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUMOR VOLUME;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84892993691     PISSN: 03639762     EISSN: 15360229     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000319     Document Type: Note

References (41)

1. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: Variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology. 1993;189:847-850
2. Keyes JW Jr. SUV: Standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1836-1839
3. Kelly MD, Declerck JM. SUV: Reducing reconstruction-dependent variation in PET SUV. EJNMMI Res. 2011;1:16
4. Maffione AM, Ferretti A, Grassetto G, et al. Fifteen different 18F-FDG PET/CT qualitative and quantitative parameters investigated as pathological response predictors of locally advanced rectal cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:853-864
5. Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, et al. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: Initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:2101-2111
6. Findlay M, Young H, Cunningham D, et al. Noninvasive monitoring of tumor metabolism using fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer liver metastases: Correlation with tumor response to fluorouracil. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:700-708
7. Groheux D, Delord M, Rubello D, et al. Variation of liver SUV on (18)FDGPET/ CT studies in women with breast cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2013; 38:422-425
8. Kuruva M, Mittal BR, Abrar ML, et al. Multivariate analysis of various factors affecting background liver and mediastinal standardized uptake values. Indian J Nucl Med. 2012;27:20-23
9. Bassa P, Kim EE, Inoue T, et al. Evaluation of preoperative chemotherapy using PET with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in breast cancer. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:931-938
10. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: Review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1773-1782
11. Capirci C, Rubello D, Chierichetti F, et al. Long-term prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer previously treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187: W202YW208
12. Capirci C, Rampin L, Erba PA, et al. Sequential FDG-PET/CT reliably predicts response of locally advanced rectal cancer to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1583-1593
13. Dedemadi G, Wexner SD. Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer: To operate or not to operate? Dig Dis. 2012;30:109-117
14. Maffione AM, Chondrogiannis S, Marzola MC, et al. Biological target volume (BTV) overlapping segmentation system (BOSS) method for avoiding falsepositive PET findings in assessing response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in rectal cancer. Clin Nucl Med. In press
15. Capirci C, Rubello D, Galeotti F, et al. The role of dual-time combined 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography in the staging and restaging workup of locally advanced rectal cancer, treated with preoperative chemoradiation therapy and radical surgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:1461-1469
16. Erdi Y, Mawlawi O, ImbriacoM, et al. Volume determination for metastatic lung lesions by adaptive PET image thresholding. Cancer. 1997;80:2505-2509
17. Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging: The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging. 1999;2:159-171
18. Gillham CM, Lucey JA, Keogan M, et al. (18)FDG uptake during induction chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer fails to predict histomorphological tumour response. Br J Cancer. 2006;95:1174-1179
19. Hatt M, Cheze-Le Rest C, Aboagye EO. Reproducibility of 18F-FDG and 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine PET tumor volume measurements. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1368-1376
20. Cheebsumon P, van Velden FH, Yaqub M. Effects of image characteristics on performance of tumor delineation methods: A test-retest assessment. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:155-158
21. Cheebsumon P, Yaqub M, van Velden FH. Impact of [(18)F]FDG PET imaging parameters on automatic tumour delineation: Need for improved tumour delineation methodology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:2136-2144
22. Frings V, de Langen AJ, Smit EF, et al. Repeatability of metabolically active volume measurements with 18F-FDG and 18F-FLT PET in non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1870-1877
23. Tateishi U, Miyake M, Nagaoka T, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: Prediction of pathologic response with PET/CT and dynamic contrastenhanced MR imaging-prospective assessment. Radiology. 2012;263:53-63
24. Hofman MS, Hicks RJ. Restaging: Should we PERCIST without pattern recognitioñ J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1830-1832
25. Hashimoto Y, Tsujikawa T, Kondo C, et al. Accuracy of PET for diagnosis of solid pulmonary lesions with 18F-FDG uptake below the standardized uptake value of 2.5. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:426-431
26. Bi L, Kim J, Wen L, et al. Automated and robust PERCIST-based thresholding framework for whole body PET-CT studies. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2012;2012:5335-5338
27. Maffione AM, Ferretti A, Chondrogiannis S, et al. Proposal of a new 18F-FDG PET/CT predictor of response in rectal cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and comparison with PERCIST criteria. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38:795-797
28. 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;58:528-535
29. Amthauer H, Denecke T, Rau B. Response prediction by FDG-PET after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and combined regional hyperthermia of rectal cancer: Correlation with endorectal ultrasound and histopathology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:811-819
30. Guillem JG, Moore HG, Akhurst T, et al. Sequential preoperative fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography assessment of response to preoperative chemoradiation: A means for determining longterm outcomes of rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:1-7
31. Melton GB, Lavely WC, Jacene HA, et al. Efficacy of preoperative combined 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography for assessing primary rectal cancer response to neoadjuvant therapy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11:961-969
32. Leibold T, Akhurst TJ, Chessin DB, et al. Evaluation of 18F-FDG-PET for early detection of suboptimal response of rectal cancer to preoperative chemoradiotherapy: A prospective analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011; 18:83-89
33. 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;71:1201-1207
34. Bampo C, Alessi A, Fantini S, et al. Is the standardized uptake value of FDGPET/ CT predictive of pathological complete response in locally advanced rectal cancer treated with capecitabine-based neoadjuvant chemoradiatioñ Oncology. 2013;84:191-199
35. Brücher BL, Weber W, Bauer M, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Ann Surg. 2001;233:300-309
36. Roedl JB, Halpern EF, Colen RR, et al. Metabolic tumor width parameters as determined on PET/CT predict disease-free survival and treatment response in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009;11:54-60
37. Hatt M, Visvikis D, Pradier O, et al. Baseline 18F-FDG PET image-derived parameters for therapy response prediction in oesophageal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1595-1606
38. Yanagawa M, Tatsumi M, Miyata H, et al. Evaluation of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer: PET response criteria in solid tumors versus response evaluation criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:872-880
39. Jacobs MA, Ouwerkerk R, Wolff AC, et al. Monitoring of neoadjuvant chemotherapy using multiparametric, 23Na sodium MR, and multimodality (PET/CT/MRI) imaging in locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;128:119-126
40. Hatt M, Groheux D, Martineau A, et al. Comparison between 18F-FDG PET image-derived indices for early prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:341-349
41. Im HJ, Kim TS, Park SY, et al. Prediction of tumour necrosis fractions using metabolic and volumetric 18F-FDG PET/CT indices, after one course and at the completion of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in children and young adults with osteosarcoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:39-49.