4.6 Article

Correlation Between PET/CT Parameters and KRAS Expression in Colorectal Cancer

Journal

CLINICAL NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Volume 39, Issue 8, Pages 685-689

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000481

Keywords

PET/CT; colorectal cancer (CRC); KRAS mutation

Funding

  1. Taiwan Ministry of Health and Welfare Clinical Trial and Research Center for Excellence [DMR-102-023, DMR-103-018, DOH102-TD-B-111-004]
  2. Taiwan Ministry of Health and Welfare Cancer Research Center for Excellence [MOHW103-TD-B-111-03]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The objective of this study was to correlate the association between mutated KRAS and wild-type colorectal cancer (CRC) by using various F-18-FDG PET-related parameters. Methods: One hundred twenty-one CRC patients who had undergone pre-operative PET/CT were included in this study. Several PET/CT-related parameters, including SUVmax and various thresholds of metabolic tumor volume, total lesion glycolysis, and PET/CT-based tumor width, were measured. Tumor-and PET/CT-related parameters were correlated with genomic expression between KRAS mutant and wild-type groups, using a Mann-Whitney U test and logistic regression analysis. Results: Colorectal cancer tumors with a mutated KRAS exhibited higher SUVmax and an increased accumulation of FDG among several threshold methods. Multivariate analysis showed that SUVmax and using a 40% threshold level for maximal uptake of TW (TW40%) were the 2 predictors of KRAS mutations. The odds ratio was 1.23 for SUVmax (P = 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.52) and 1.15 for TW40% (P = 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.30). The accuracy of SUVmax for predicting mutated KRAS was higher in patients with colon or sigmoid colon cancers, whereas it was TW40% in those with rectal cancers. Conclusions: SUVmax and TW40% were associated in CRC with KRAS mutations. PET/CT parameters can supplement genomic analysis to determine KRAS expression in CRC.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available