4.7 Article

Volume-Based Parameter of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: Prediction of Therapeutic Response and Prognostic Implications

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 17, 期 10, 页码 2787-2794

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-010-1107-z

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. To evaluate the importance of assessing volume-based parameter of F-18-FDG PET/CT in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) for the prediction of response and patient outcome early in the course of treatment. Materials and Methods. Patients (n = 13; M:F = 9:4, mean age, 54 years) with histopathologically proven MPM, all of whom were scheduled to undergo curative extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) or palliative chemotherapy, were included in this study. They were evaluated using integrated F-18-FDG PET/CT at baseline. Maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), average SUV (SUVavg), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were measured using PET/CT data. Relationships between tumor progression and PET parameters were statistically analyzed. Results. Of the 13 patients, 8 (62%) developed disease recurrence after surgery or tumor progression after chemotherapy (median follow-up, 329 days; range, 28-536 days). Between subgroups with and without tumor progression, significant differences were noted in MTV (P = 0.045). On ROC curve analysis, MTV (AUC = 0.850, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.550-0.977) and TLG (AUC = 0.800, 95% CI 0.494-0.960) showed good predictive performance for tumor progression. Multivariate analysis adjusted for treatment modality showed that MTV (HR 1.003, P = 0.025) and TLG (HR 1.001, P = 0.031) were independent factors associated with tumor progression. Time to tumor progression was shorter in patients with a high volume-based parameter of PET than in those with a low value. Conclusions. Volume-based parameters of F-18-FDG PET/CT have the potential to provide prognostic information in MPM patients who are receiving surgery or palliative chemotherapy.

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