Cargando…

Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study

PURPOSE: In head and neck cancer (HNC) various treatment strategies have been developed to improve outcome, but selecting patients for these intensified treatments remains difficult. Therefore, identification of novel pretreatment assays to predict outcome is of interest. In HNC there are indication...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schinagl, Dominic A. X., Span, Paul N., Oyen, Wim J., Kaanders, Johannes H. A. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3127003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21461734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-011-1789-x
_version_ 1782207315985825792
author Schinagl, Dominic A. X.
Span, Paul N.
Oyen, Wim J.
Kaanders, Johannes H. A. M.
author_facet Schinagl, Dominic A. X.
Span, Paul N.
Oyen, Wim J.
Kaanders, Johannes H. A. M.
author_sort Schinagl, Dominic A. X.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: In head and neck cancer (HNC) various treatment strategies have been developed to improve outcome, but selecting patients for these intensified treatments remains difficult. Therefore, identification of novel pretreatment assays to predict outcome is of interest. In HNC there are indications that pretreatment tumour (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake may be an independent prognostic factor. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of FDG uptake and CT-based and FDG PET-based primary tumour volume measurements in patients with HNC treated with (chemo)radiotherapy. METHODS: A total of 77 patients with stage II–IV HNC who were eligible for definitive (chemo)radiotherapy underwent coregistered pretreatment CT and FDG PET. The gross tumour volume of the primary tumour was determined on the CT (GTV(CT)) and FDG PET scans. Five PET segmentation methods were applied: interpreting FDG PET visually (PET(VIS)), applying an isocontour at a standardized uptake value (SUV) of 2.5 (PET(2.5)), using fixed thresholds of 40% and 50% (PET(40%), PET(50%)) of the maximum intratumoral FDG activity (SUV(MAX)) and applying an adaptive threshold based on the signal-to-background (PET(SBR)). Mean FDG uptake for each PET-based volume was recorded (SUV(mean)). Subsequently, to determine the metabolic volume, the integrated SUV was calculated as the product of PET-based volume and SUV(mean). All these variables were analysed as potential predictors of local control (LC), regional recurrence-free survival (RRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In oral cavity/oropharynx tumours PET(VIS) was the only volume-based method able to predict LC. Both PET(VIS) and GTV(CT) were able to predict DMFS, DFS and OS in these subsites. Integrated SUVs were associated with LC, DMFS, DFS and OS, while SUV(mean) and SUV(MAX) were not. In hypopharyngeal/laryngeal tumours none of the variables was associated with outcome. CONCLUSION: There is no role yet for pretreatment FDG PET as a predictor of (chemo)radiotherapy outcome in HNC in daily routine. However, this potential application needs further exploration, focusing both on FDG PET-based primary tumour volume, integrated SUV and SUV(MAX) of the primary tumour.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3127003
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31270032011-08-09 Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study Schinagl, Dominic A. X. Span, Paul N. Oyen, Wim J. Kaanders, Johannes H. A. M. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Original Article PURPOSE: In head and neck cancer (HNC) various treatment strategies have been developed to improve outcome, but selecting patients for these intensified treatments remains difficult. Therefore, identification of novel pretreatment assays to predict outcome is of interest. In HNC there are indications that pretreatment tumour (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake may be an independent prognostic factor. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of FDG uptake and CT-based and FDG PET-based primary tumour volume measurements in patients with HNC treated with (chemo)radiotherapy. METHODS: A total of 77 patients with stage II–IV HNC who were eligible for definitive (chemo)radiotherapy underwent coregistered pretreatment CT and FDG PET. The gross tumour volume of the primary tumour was determined on the CT (GTV(CT)) and FDG PET scans. Five PET segmentation methods were applied: interpreting FDG PET visually (PET(VIS)), applying an isocontour at a standardized uptake value (SUV) of 2.5 (PET(2.5)), using fixed thresholds of 40% and 50% (PET(40%), PET(50%)) of the maximum intratumoral FDG activity (SUV(MAX)) and applying an adaptive threshold based on the signal-to-background (PET(SBR)). Mean FDG uptake for each PET-based volume was recorded (SUV(mean)). Subsequently, to determine the metabolic volume, the integrated SUV was calculated as the product of PET-based volume and SUV(mean). All these variables were analysed as potential predictors of local control (LC), regional recurrence-free survival (RRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In oral cavity/oropharynx tumours PET(VIS) was the only volume-based method able to predict LC. Both PET(VIS) and GTV(CT) were able to predict DMFS, DFS and OS in these subsites. Integrated SUVs were associated with LC, DMFS, DFS and OS, while SUV(mean) and SUV(MAX) were not. In hypopharyngeal/laryngeal tumours none of the variables was associated with outcome. CONCLUSION: There is no role yet for pretreatment FDG PET as a predictor of (chemo)radiotherapy outcome in HNC in daily routine. However, this potential application needs further exploration, focusing both on FDG PET-based primary tumour volume, integrated SUV and SUV(MAX) of the primary tumour. Springer-Verlag 2011-04-02 2011 /pmc/articles/PMC3127003/ /pubmed/21461734 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-011-1789-x Text en © The Author(s) 2011 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Schinagl, Dominic A. X.
Span, Paul N.
Oyen, Wim J.
Kaanders, Johannes H. A. M.
Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study
title Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study
title_full Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study
title_fullStr Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study
title_full_unstemmed Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study
title_short Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study
title_sort can fdg pet predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? results of a prospective study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3127003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21461734
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00259-011-1789-x
work_keys_str_mv AT schinagldominicax canfdgpetpredictradiationtreatmentoutcomeinheadandneckcancerresultsofaprospectivestudy
AT spanpauln canfdgpetpredictradiationtreatmentoutcomeinheadandneckcancerresultsofaprospectivestudy
AT oyenwimj canfdgpetpredictradiationtreatmentoutcomeinheadandneckcancerresultsofaprospectivestudy
AT kaandersjohannesham canfdgpetpredictradiationtreatmentoutcomeinheadandneckcancerresultsofaprospectivestudy