Cargando…

A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer

INTRODUCTION: Anal cancer (AC) is (18)F‐FDG‐PET avid and has been used to evaluate treatment response several months after chemoradiotherapy. This pilot study aimed to assess the utility of semi‐automated contouring methods and quantitative measures of treatment response using (18)F‐FDG‐PET imaging...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smith, Drew, Joon, Daryl Lim, Knight, Kellie, Sim, Jenny, Schneider, Michal, Lau, Eddie, Foroudi, Farshad, Khoo, Vincent
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35906833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.611
_version_ 1784842240815792128
author Smith, Drew
Joon, Daryl Lim
Knight, Kellie
Sim, Jenny
Schneider, Michal
Lau, Eddie
Foroudi, Farshad
Khoo, Vincent
author_facet Smith, Drew
Joon, Daryl Lim
Knight, Kellie
Sim, Jenny
Schneider, Michal
Lau, Eddie
Foroudi, Farshad
Khoo, Vincent
author_sort Smith, Drew
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Anal cancer (AC) is (18)F‐FDG‐PET avid and has been used to evaluate treatment response several months after chemoradiotherapy. This pilot study aimed to assess the utility of semi‐automated contouring methods and quantitative measures of treatment response using (18)F‐FDG‐PET imaging at the early time point of 1‐month post‐chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: Eleven patients with AC referred for chemoradiotherapy were prospectively enrolled into this study, with 10 meeting eligibility requirements. (18)F‐FDG‐PET imaging was obtained pre‐chemoradiotherapy (TP1), and then 1‐month (TP2), 3–6 months (TP3) and 9–12 months (TP4) post‐chemoradiotherapy. Manual and semi‐automated (Threshold) contouring methods were used to define the primary tumour on all (18)F‐FDG‐PET images. Resultant contours from each method were interrogated using quantitative measures, including volume, response index (RI), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), SUV(max), SUV(median) and SUV(mean). Response was assessed quantitatively as reductions in these measures and also qualitatively against established criteria. RESULTS: Nine patients were qualitatively classified as complete metabolic responders at TP2 and all 10 at TP3. All quantitative measures demonstrated significant (P < 0.05) reductions at TP2 for both Manual and Threshold methods. All reduced further at TP3 and again at TP4 for Threshold methods. TLG showed the highest reduction at all post‐chemoradiotherapy time points and classified the most responders for each method at each time point. All patients are recurrence‐free at minimum 4‐year follow‐up. CONCLUSION: Based on our small sample size, semi‐automated methods of disease definition using (18)F‐FDG‐PET imaging are feasible and appear to facilitate quantitative response classification of AC as early as 1‐month post‐chemoradiotherapy. Early identification of treatment response may potentially improve disease management.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9714497
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97144972022-12-02 A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer Smith, Drew Joon, Daryl Lim Knight, Kellie Sim, Jenny Schneider, Michal Lau, Eddie Foroudi, Farshad Khoo, Vincent J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: Anal cancer (AC) is (18)F‐FDG‐PET avid and has been used to evaluate treatment response several months after chemoradiotherapy. This pilot study aimed to assess the utility of semi‐automated contouring methods and quantitative measures of treatment response using (18)F‐FDG‐PET imaging at the early time point of 1‐month post‐chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: Eleven patients with AC referred for chemoradiotherapy were prospectively enrolled into this study, with 10 meeting eligibility requirements. (18)F‐FDG‐PET imaging was obtained pre‐chemoradiotherapy (TP1), and then 1‐month (TP2), 3–6 months (TP3) and 9–12 months (TP4) post‐chemoradiotherapy. Manual and semi‐automated (Threshold) contouring methods were used to define the primary tumour on all (18)F‐FDG‐PET images. Resultant contours from each method were interrogated using quantitative measures, including volume, response index (RI), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), SUV(max), SUV(median) and SUV(mean). Response was assessed quantitatively as reductions in these measures and also qualitatively against established criteria. RESULTS: Nine patients were qualitatively classified as complete metabolic responders at TP2 and all 10 at TP3. All quantitative measures demonstrated significant (P < 0.05) reductions at TP2 for both Manual and Threshold methods. All reduced further at TP3 and again at TP4 for Threshold methods. TLG showed the highest reduction at all post‐chemoradiotherapy time points and classified the most responders for each method at each time point. All patients are recurrence‐free at minimum 4‐year follow‐up. CONCLUSION: Based on our small sample size, semi‐automated methods of disease definition using (18)F‐FDG‐PET imaging are feasible and appear to facilitate quantitative response classification of AC as early as 1‐month post‐chemoradiotherapy. Early identification of treatment response may potentially improve disease management. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-07-30 2022-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9714497/ /pubmed/35906833 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.611 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Smith, Drew
Joon, Daryl Lim
Knight, Kellie
Sim, Jenny
Schneider, Michal
Lau, Eddie
Foroudi, Farshad
Khoo, Vincent
A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer
title A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer
title_full A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer
title_fullStr A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer
title_full_unstemmed A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer
title_short A pilot study investigating the role of (18)F‐FDG‐PET in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer
title_sort pilot study investigating the role of (18)f‐fdg‐pet in the early identification of chemoradiotherapy response in anal cancer
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9714497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35906833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.611
work_keys_str_mv AT smithdrew apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT joondaryllim apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT knightkellie apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT simjenny apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT schneidermichal apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT laueddie apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT foroudifarshad apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT khoovincent apilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT smithdrew pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT joondaryllim pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT knightkellie pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT simjenny pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT schneidermichal pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT laueddie pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT foroudifarshad pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer
AT khoovincent pilotstudyinvestigatingtheroleof18ffdgpetintheearlyidentificationofchemoradiotherapyresponseinanalcancer