4.1 Article

Change in glucose metabolism measured by 18F-FDG PET/CT as a predictor of histopathologic response to neoadjuvant treatment in rectal cancer

Journal

ABDOMINAL IMAGING
Volume 36, Issue 1, Pages 38-45

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-009-9594-8

Keywords

Rectal cancer; PET/CT; Neoadjuvant therapy; Therapy response; SUV; Glucose metabolism

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to analyze the changes of glucose metabolism by maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with rectal cancer submitted to neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (nRCT) and to correlate SUV changes with tumor regression grade (TRG). Three sequential 18F-FDG PET/CT studies were performed in 31 patients with rectal cancer at the following time point: before starting the treatment (PET/CT1), during the treatment (PET/CT2), and after completion of neoadjuvant treatment (PET/CT3). The SUVmax values of the rectal lesion in the PET/CT1 (SUV1), PET/CT2 (SUV2), and PET/CT3 (SUV3) were obtained; deltaSUV1 [(SUV1 - SUV2)/SUV1] and deltaSUV2 [(SUV1 - SUV3)/SUV1] were also calculated. Metabolic parameters were compared to TRG. Significant differences in pathologic responder and non-responder patients were found only for SUV2 (6.4 +/- A 2.9 in responder and 10.7 +/- A 4.8 in non-responder patients, respectively; P = 0.006) and SUV3 (3.6 +/- A 1.4 in responder and 6.6 +/- A 2.1 in non-responder patients, respectively; P = 0.0009). The best predictor for TRG response was SUV3 (threshold of 4.4) with sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of 77.3%, 88.9%, 80.7%, 61.5%, and 94.4%, respectively. 18F-FDG PET/CT is a reliable and accurate technique to assess the response to nRCT in rectal cancer. In our population, the absolute value of SUVmax after treatment was the best predictor of pathological response.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available