4.7 Article

18F-FDG PET scanning correlates with tissue markers of poor prognosis and predicts mortality for patients after liver resection for colorectal metastases

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
卷 48, 期 5, 页码 771-775

出版社

SOC NUCLEAR MEDICINE INC
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.106.037291

关键词

hepatic metastases; outcome; prognostic variables; F-18-FDG; PET; SUV

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R25-CA096945-3, R01 CA/DK80982, R01 CA75416] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

F-18-FDG PET has proven invaluable in the staging of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The aim of the current study was to determine whether this biologic scan would correlate with other cellular characteristics and the clinical behavior of tumors. Methods: Ninety patients with resectable colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver underwent 18F-FDG PET before hepatectomy. At surgery, tumors were harvested and prepared for assessment by histology and immunohistochemistry. Expression of Ki67 (a marker for cell proliferation), GLUT1 and GLUT3 (markers for glucose transportation), p53 and p27 (markers for cell cycle control), and BCL-2 (a marker for apoptosis) was assessed by a pathologist who was unaware of the PET results and the clinical outcome. Patients were followed to determine outcome. Survival analysis was performed comparing patient outcome in groups segregated according to standardized uptake values (SUVs) greater or less than 5, 7, or 10. Results: Maximum SUV correlated with GLUT1 (P = 0.03), Ki67 (P = 0.026), and p53 (P = 0.024) but did not correlate with p27, BCL-2, or GLUT3. Survival was significantly longer for patients with a low SUV than for patients with a high SUV, with P values of 0.014, 0.025, and 0.0095 for SUV cutoffs of 5, 7, and 10, respectively. Conclusion: F-18-FDG PET is a biologic scan that predicts prognosis in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. It is uncertain if this ability is due to cellular glucose metabolism or to a correlation with other cellular characteristics of aggressive tumors.

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