Cargando…
Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the TNM classification with 2-[(18)F]FDG PE T biological parameters of primary tumor in patients with NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on a group of 79 newly diagnosed NSCLC patients. PET scans were acquired on Gemini...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Via Medica
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8281901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34277098 http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/RPOR.a2021.0072 |
_version_ | 1783722909238296576 |
---|---|
author | Cegla, Paulina Bryl, Maciej Witkowska, Kamila Bos-Liedke, Agnieszka Pietrasz, Katarzyna Kycler, Witold Malicki, Julian Piotrowski, Tomasz Czepczyński, Rafał |
author_facet | Cegla, Paulina Bryl, Maciej Witkowska, Kamila Bos-Liedke, Agnieszka Pietrasz, Katarzyna Kycler, Witold Malicki, Julian Piotrowski, Tomasz Czepczyński, Rafał |
author_sort | Cegla, Paulina |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the TNM classification with 2-[(18)F]FDG PE T biological parameters of primary tumor in patients with NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on a group of 79 newly diagnosed NSCLC patients. PET scans were acquired on Gemini TF PET/CT scanner 60–70 min after injection of 2-[(18)F]FDG with the mean activity of 364 ± 75 MBq, with the area being examined from the vertex to mid-thigh. The reconstructed PET images were evaluated using MIM 7.0 Software for SUV(max), MTV and TLG values. RESULTS: The analysis of the cancer stage according to TNM 8(th) edition showed stage IA2 in 8 patients, stage IA3 — 6 patients, stage IB — 4 patients, IIA — 3 patients, 15 patients with stage IIB, stage IIIA — 17 patients, IIIB — 5, IIIC — 5, IVA in 7 patients and stage IVB in 9 patients. The lowest TLG values of primary tumor were observed in stage IA2 (11.31 ± 15.27) and the highest in stage IIIC (1003.20 ± 953.59). The lowest value of primary tumor in SUV(max) and MTV were found in stage IA2 (6.8 ± 3.8 and 1.37 ± 0.42, respectively), while the highest SUV(max) of primary tumor was found in stage IIA (13.4 ± 11.4) and MTV in stage IIIC (108.15 ± 127.24). CONCLUSION: TNM stages are characterized by different primary tumor 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters, which might complement patient outcome. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8281901 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Via Medica |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82819012021-07-16 Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients Cegla, Paulina Bryl, Maciej Witkowska, Kamila Bos-Liedke, Agnieszka Pietrasz, Katarzyna Kycler, Witold Malicki, Julian Piotrowski, Tomasz Czepczyński, Rafał Rep Pract Oncol Radiother Research Paper BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare the TNM classification with 2-[(18)F]FDG PE T biological parameters of primary tumor in patients with NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on a group of 79 newly diagnosed NSCLC patients. PET scans were acquired on Gemini TF PET/CT scanner 60–70 min after injection of 2-[(18)F]FDG with the mean activity of 364 ± 75 MBq, with the area being examined from the vertex to mid-thigh. The reconstructed PET images were evaluated using MIM 7.0 Software for SUV(max), MTV and TLG values. RESULTS: The analysis of the cancer stage according to TNM 8(th) edition showed stage IA2 in 8 patients, stage IA3 — 6 patients, stage IB — 4 patients, IIA — 3 patients, 15 patients with stage IIB, stage IIIA — 17 patients, IIIB — 5, IIIC — 5, IVA in 7 patients and stage IVB in 9 patients. The lowest TLG values of primary tumor were observed in stage IA2 (11.31 ± 15.27) and the highest in stage IIIC (1003.20 ± 953.59). The lowest value of primary tumor in SUV(max) and MTV were found in stage IA2 (6.8 ± 3.8 and 1.37 ± 0.42, respectively), while the highest SUV(max) of primary tumor was found in stage IIA (13.4 ± 11.4) and MTV in stage IIIC (108.15 ± 127.24). CONCLUSION: TNM stages are characterized by different primary tumor 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters, which might complement patient outcome. Via Medica 2021-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8281901/ /pubmed/34277098 http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/RPOR.a2021.0072 Text en © 2021 Greater Poland Cancer Centre https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is available in open access under Creative Common Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) ) license, allowing to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially |
spellingShingle | Research Paper Cegla, Paulina Bryl, Maciej Witkowska, Kamila Bos-Liedke, Agnieszka Pietrasz, Katarzyna Kycler, Witold Malicki, Julian Piotrowski, Tomasz Czepczyński, Rafał Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients |
title | Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients |
title_full | Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients |
title_fullStr | Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients |
title_short | Differences between TNM classification and 2-[(18)F]FDG PET parameters of primary tumor in NSCLC patients |
title_sort | differences between tnm classification and 2-[(18)f]fdg pet parameters of primary tumor in nsclc patients |
topic | Research Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8281901/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34277098 http://dx.doi.org/10.5603/RPOR.a2021.0072 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ceglapaulina differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT brylmaciej differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT witkowskakamila differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT bosliedkeagnieszka differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT pietraszkatarzyna differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT kyclerwitold differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT malickijulian differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT piotrowskitomasz differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients AT czepczynskirafał differencesbetweentnmclassificationand218ffdgpetparametersofprimarytumorinnsclcpatients |