Cargando…

Lesion Analysis in PERCIST 1.0: Clinical Ease versus Research Requisite—Where Does the Balance Exist?

Background  Semiqualitative parameter SUVmax has been the most frequently used semiquantitative positron emission tomography (PET) parameter for response evaluation, but only metabolic activity of a single (most metabolic) lesion is predicted. Newer response parameters such as tumor lesion glycolysi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Bhoil, Amit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2023
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10202569/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37223629
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1750406
Descripción
Sumario:Background  Semiqualitative parameter SUVmax has been the most frequently used semiquantitative positron emission tomography (PET) parameter for response evaluation, but only metabolic activity of a single (most metabolic) lesion is predicted. Newer response parameters such as tumor lesion glycolysis (TLG) incorporating lesions' metabolic volume or whole-body metabolic tumor burden (MTBwb) are being explored for response evaluation. Evaluation and comparison of response with different semiquantitative PET parameters such as SUVmax and TLG in most metabolic lesion, multiple lesions (max of five), and MTBwb in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients were made. The different PET parameters were analyzed for response evaluation, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Methods   (18) F-FDG-PET/CT (18-fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography) imaging was performed in 23 patients (M = 14, F = 9, mean age = 57.6 years) with stage IIIB–IV advanced NSCLC before initiation of therapy with oral estimated glomerular filtration rate-tyrosine kinase inhibitor for early and late response evaluation. The quantitative PET parameters such as SUVmax and TLG were measured in single (most metabolic) lesion, multiple lesions, and MTBwb. The parameters SUVmax, TLG, and MTBwb were compared for early and late response evaluation and analyzed for OS and PFS Results  No significant difference in change in response evaluation was seen in patients evaluated with most metabolic lesion, multiple lesions, or MTBwb. Difference in early (DC 22, NDC 1) and late (DC 20, NDC 3) response evaluation was seen that remained unchanged when lesions were measured in terms of number of lesions or the MTBwb. The early imaging was seen to be statistically significant to the OS compared with late imaging. Conclusions  Single (most metabolic) lesion shows similar disease response and OS to multiple lesions and MTBwb. Response evaluation by late imaging offered no significant advantage compared with early imaging. Thus, early response evaluation with SUVmax parameter offers a good balance between clinical ease and research requisition.