Are Semiquantitative Methods Superior to Deauville Scoring in the Monitoring Therapy Response for Pediatric Hodgkin Lymphoma?

Tailoring treatment in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is paramount to maximize outcomes while avoiding unnecessary toxicity. We aimed to compare the performance of SUV(max) reduction (ΔSUV(max%)) and the PET ratio (rPET) versus the Deauville score (DS) for assessing the chemotherapy response in pediatric HL patients undergoing (18)F-FDG PET-CT. Fifty-two patients with biopsy-proven HL (aged 8–16 years) were enrolled at baseline, interim (after the second or third chemotherapy round) and post-therapy (on completion of first-line chemotherapy). Interim and post-therapy DS, ΔSUV(max%) and rPET were compared as response predictors. Patients were classified as responders or non-responders based on a 24-month clinical follow-up. Interim DS showed a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy of 100%, 80.4%, 100%, 40% and 82.7%, respectively, in predicting the therapy response. Post-therapy DS showed a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of 66.7%, 97.8%, 95.7%, 80% and 94.2%, repsectively. Interim ΔSUV(max%) showed a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of 83.3%, 82.6%, 97.4%, 38.5% and 82.7%, respectively, with a 56.3% cutoff. Post-therapy ΔSUV(max%) showed a sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of 83.3%, 84.8%, 97.5%, 41.7% and 84.6%, respectively, with a 76.8% cutoff. Compared to ΔSUV(max%), DS showed a significantly higher sensitivity, specificity (p < 0.05) and NPV (p < 0.01). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of rPET in predicting the therapy response at 24 months were 76.1%, 100%, 100%, 35.3% and 78.8%, respectively, with a cut-off of 1.31. DS and rPET showed comparable predictive performance (p > 0.58). In conclusion, DS is an easier method with better performance than ΔSUV(max%) and rPET in predicting the chemotherapy response in pediatric HL patients.