4.7 Article

Metabolic Tumor Volume Predicts Disease Progression and Survival in Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Anal Canal

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
卷 54, 期 1, 页码 27-32

出版社

SOC NUCLEAR MEDICINE INC
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.112.109470

关键词

PET; metabolic tumor volume; anal cancer; IMRT; SUV

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PET imaging has become a useful diagnostic tool in patients with anal cancer. We evaluated the prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume (MTV) in patients with anal cancer treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy. Methods: Patients with anal cancer who underwent PET imaging for pretreatment staging or radiation therapy planning from 2003 to 2011 were included. PET parameters included MTV and maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax). Total MTV (MTV-T) was defined as the sum of the volumes above a standardized uptake value 50% of the SUVmax within the primary tumor and involved nodes. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were used to test for associations between metabolic or clinical endpoints and overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and event-free survival (EFS). Results: Thirty-nine patients were included. Median follow-up for the cohort was 22 mo. Overall, 6 patients died and 9 patients had disease progression. The 2-y OS, PFS, and EFS for the entire cohort were 88%, 74%, and 69%, respectively. Higher MTV-T was associated with worse OS (P = 0.04), PFS (P = 0.004), and EFS (P = 0.002) on univariate analysis. Patients with an MTV greater than 26 cm(3) had worse PFS than did those with an MTV of 26 cm(3) or less (33% vs. 82%, P = 0.003). SUVmax was not prognostic for any outcome. Higher T classification (T3/T4 vs. T1/T2) was associated with worse PFS and EFS. When adjusting for T classification, MTV-T remained a significant predictor for PFS (P = 0.01) and EFS (P = 0.02). Conclusion: MTV-T yields prognostic information on PFS and EFS beyond that of established prognostic factors in patients with anal cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据