Comparison of 18F-FLT PET and 18F-FDG PET in Esophageal Cancer

Article Figures & Data

Download figure
Open in new tab
Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1.
¹⁸F-FDG PET (A) and ¹⁸F-FLT PET (B) of patient 2 with long esophageal tumor.

TABLE 1

Patient Characteristics and Staging Results

Patient no.	Sex	Age (y)	Localization	Histology	Treatment	Staging									¹⁸F-FDG PET			¹⁸F-FLT PET			Proliferation: Ki-67 (% ± SE)
Patient no.	Sex	Age (y)	Localization	Histology	Treatment							EUS	CT	¹⁸F-FDG PET	¹⁸F-FLT PET	Surgery or PA	SUV_max	SUV_mean	SUV_max	SUV_mean	Proliferation: Ki-67 (% ± SE)
1	M	73	Distal	AC	Esophagectomy	T3 N1 M0	T3 N1 M0	T+ N1 M0	T+ N1 M0	T3 N1 M0	7.82	6.22	3.85	3.15	78 ± 1.97
2	M	75	Mid	AC	Esophagectomy	T3 N1 M0	T3 N1 M0	T+ N0 M0	T+ N0 M0	T3 N1 M0	8.90	7.24	4.93	3.85	65 ± 2.19
3	M	68	GEJ	AC	Esophagectomy	T3 N1 M0	T3 N1 M0	T+ N0 M0	T+ N0 M0	T3 N1 M0	12.16	9.79	2.85	2.32	85 ± 3.55
4	M	70	Distal	AC	Esophagectomy	T1 N1 M0	Tx N1 M0	T+ N0 M1a	T+ N0 M0	T2 N1 M0	6.99	5.71	NA	NA	76 ± 2.56
5	F	57	Mid	AC	Stent	T3 N1 M0	T4 N1 M1b	T+ N1 M1b	T+ N0 M0	NA	5.92	4.74	5.11	4.09	68 ± 2.89
6	M	48	GEJ	AC	Esophagectomy	T3 N0 M0	T3 N0 M0	T+ N0 M0	T+ N0 M0	T3 N0 M0	5.67	4.59	4.41	3.58	77 ± 3.35
7	M	56	Mid	SCC	Stent	T3 N1 M0	T3 N0 M0	T+ N0 M0	T+ N0 M0	T4 N1 Mx	14.04	11.50	5.25	4.27	62 ± 5.15
8	F	50	Distal	AC	Esophagectomy	T3 N1 M0	T3 N0 M1	T+ N0 M0	T+ N0 M0	T3 N1 M0	5.50	4.62	2.89	2.30	72 ± 2.49
9	F	57	Mid	SCC	Esophagectomy	T3 N0 M0	T3 N1 M0	T+ N0 M0	T+ N1 M0	T3 N1 M0	8.12	6.76	3.63	2.99	74 ± 5.85
10	M	65	Distal	AC	Esophagectomy	T3 N1 M0	T4 N0 M0	T+ N1 M0	T− N0 M0	T4 N1 M0	4.40	3.58	NA	NA	57 ± 6.61

PA = pathology; AC = adenocarcinoma; mid = mid-esophagus; GEJ = gastroesophageal junction; NA = not applicable; SCC = squamous cell carcinoma.