HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Related articles in JNM Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Nahmias, C. Articles by Townsend, D. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Nahmias, C. Articles by Townsend, D. W.

Time Course of Early Response to Chemotherapy in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT

¹ Departments of Medicine and Radiology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee; and ² Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Claude Nahmias, PhD, Molecular Imaging and Tracer Development Program, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tennessee, 1924 Alcoa Hwy., Box 93, Knoxville, TN 37920-6999. E-mail: CNahmias{at}mc.utmck.edu

PET and ¹⁸F-FDG have the potential to follow the early metabolic response to chemotherapy in patients with non–small cell lung cancer and to predict success or failure of the therapy. Methods: We studied 16 patients with non–small cell lung cancer as they followed 2 courses of docetaxel and carboplatin. Each patient was studied weekly for 7 wk, and tissue activity was assessed by the amount of radioactivity retained 90 min after the intravenous injection of ¹⁸F-FDG. In a prospective analysis, the linear least-squares method was used to evaluate the time course of metabolic activity in tumor and liver, bone marrow, and unaffected lung tissues; a metabolic response was defined as a response in which the slope of the regression was negative and significantly different from zero. Our hypothesis was that patients who exhibited a tumor metabolic response would survive longer than those who did not. In a retrospective examination of our data, we grouped our patients into those who survived <6 mo and those who survived longer and calculated the difference in the standardized uptake value (SUV) between day 7 and subsequent time points to determine the most appropriate timing of 2 PET studies in predicting response to therapy. Results: Fifteen of 16 patients completed the study. In the prospective study, 8 patients were classified as nonresponders as the slope of the regression of tumor SUV versus time was not different from zero; they all died within 35 wk of the end of their study. Seven patients were classified as responders; 5 survived and 2 died, one at 25 wk and the other at 76 wk. In the retrospective study, a decrease of 0.5 SUV between studies performed at 1 and 3 wk after the initiation of chemotherapy was predictive of those patients who survived >6 mo and in whom chemotherapy was presumably successful. Conclusion: Patients with non–small cell lung cancer who had a positive outcome, as exhibited by prolonged survival, were those who showed a tumor metabolic response assessed using weekly ¹⁸F-FDG PET studies. ¹⁸F-FDG PET studies performed at 1 and 3 wk after the initiation of chemotherapy allowed prediction of the response to therapy.

Key Words: ¹⁸F-FDG • PET • non–small cell lung cancer • treatment monitoring

COPYRIGHT © 2007 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

Related articles in JNM:

This Month in JNM

JNM 2007 48: 11a-12a. [Full Text]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. J. Hicks Role of 18F-FDG PET in Assessment of Response in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2009; 50(Suppl_1): 31S - 42S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. G. Hanna, J. McAleese, T. B. Lynch, and J. M. O'Sullivan Standardization of Scanning for [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography J. Clin. Oncol., February 10, 2009; 27(5): 831 - 832. [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Tanvetyanon, E. A. Eikman, and G. Bepler In Reply J. Clin. Oncol., February 10, 2009; 27(5): 832 - 832. [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Zhao, L. H. Schwartz, and S. M. Larson Imaging Surrogates of Tumor Response to Therapy: Anatomic and Functional Biomarkers J. Nucl. Med., February 1, 2009; 50(2): 239 - 249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. A. Weber The Use of Positron Emission Tomography versus Computerized Tomography Scans in the Assessment of Response to Therapy ASCO Educational Book, January 1, 2009; 2009(1): 474 - 478. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Nahmias and L. M. Wahl Reproducibility of Standardized Uptake Value Measurements Determined by 18F-FDG PET in Malignant Tumors J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2008; 49(11): 1804 - 1808. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. V. Frangioni New Technologies for Human Cancer Imaging J. Clin. Oncol., August 20, 2008; 26(24): 4012 - 4021. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]