Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleClinical Investigation

Prediction of 177Lu-DOTATATE PRRT Outcome Using Multimodality Imaging in Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from a Prospective Phase II LUMEN Study

Magdalena Mileva, Gwennaëlle Marin, Hugo Levillain, Carlos Artigas, Camille Van Bogaert, Clémentine Marin, Rachele Danieli, Amelie Deleporte, Simona Picchia, Konstantinos Stathopoulos, Christiane Jungels, Bruno Vanderlinden, Marianne Paesmans, Lieveke Ameye, Gabriela Critchi, Loubna Taraji-Schiltz, Chloe Velghe, Zéna Wimana, Maria Bali, Alain Hendlisz, Patrick Flamen and Ioannis Karfis
Journal of Nuclear Medicine February 2024, 65 (2) 236-244; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.123.265987
Magdalena Mileva
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gwennaëlle Marin
2Medical Physics Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Hugo Levillain
2Medical Physics Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carlos Artigas
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Camille Van Bogaert
3Nuclear Medicine Department, CUB-Hôpital Erasme, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Clémentine Marin
2Medical Physics Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rachele Danieli
2Medical Physics Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amelie Deleporte
4Medical Oncology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Simona Picchia
5Radiology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Konstantinos Stathopoulos
5Radiology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christiane Jungels
4Medical Oncology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bruno Vanderlinden
2Medical Physics Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Marianne Paesmans
6Data Center, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lieveke Ameye
6Data Center, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gabriela Critchi
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Loubna Taraji-Schiltz
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chloe Velghe
6Data Center, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zéna Wimana
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
7Radiopharmacy Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maria Bali
5Radiology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alain Hendlisz
4Medical Oncology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Patrick Flamen
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ioannis Karfis
1Nuclear Medicine Department, Institut Jules Bordet, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    Scatterplot with locally weighted scatterplot smoothing and 95% CI of SSTR TV and total lesion SSTR expression on baseline 68Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT and during subsequent treatment cycles. At left are morphologically responding lesions showing partial or complete response; at right are morphologically nonresponding lesions showing stable or progressive disease. CR = complete response; Loess = locally weighted scatterplot smoothing; PD = progressive disease; PR = partial response; SD = stable disease; TL = total lesion.

  • FIGURE 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2.

    Kaplan–Meier curves of progression-free survival for SSTR TV change after C1 in all patients (A) and excluding patients with pancreatic primary NET (B), minimal absorbed dose per target lesion in C1 in all patients (C) and excluding patients with pancreatic primary NET (D), and combination of SSTR TV change after C1 and minimal absorbed dose per target lesion in C1 in all patients (E) and excluding patients with pancreatic primary NET (F). minC1 absorbed dose = minimal absorbed dose per target lesion in C1.

  • FIGURE 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3.

    Tumor-absorbed dose as function of PRRT cycle across all target lesions. Whiskers indicate fifth and 95th percentiles.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    TABLE 1.

    Patients’ Demographics and Tumor Characteristics

    CharacteristicData
    Sex
     Male19 (51)
     Female18 (49)
    Mean age at diagnosis (y)61 ± 10
    Mean age at inclusion (y)66 ± 8.1
    Median time since diagnosis (y)3.4 (IQR, 1.7–7.7)
    Primary tumor site
     Small intestinal23 (62)
     Pancreatic10 (27)
     Colorectal4 (11)
    Tumor grade
     112 (32)
     222 (59)
     33 (8)
    Site of metastasis
     Liver32 (86)
     Lymph nodes31 (84)
     Bone22 (59)
     Peritoneum12 (32)
     Pancreas3 (8)
     Lung2 (5)
     Other*6 (16)
    Metastatic sites involved
     Median number3 (range, 1–5)
     ≤325 (68)
     >312 (32)
    Symptoms
     Diarrhea16 (43)
     Pain15 (41)
     Fatigue11 (30)
     Flushing9 (24)
     No symptoms12 (32)
    18F-FDG PET/CT–positive at baseline15 (41)
    Previous treatment lines37 (100)
    Previous treatments
     Surgery (including primary tumor resection)27 (73)
     Somatostatin analogs36 (97)
     Targeted therapy†11 (30)
     Chemotherapy8 (22)
     Liver-targeted therapy‡8 (22)
     Radiotherapy (external-beam radiation)4 (11)
     Interferon1 (3)
    Median number of previous treatment lines (all)2 (range, 1–10)
    Previous systemic treatment lines (excluding somatostatin analogs)16 (43)
     110 (27)
     25 (13)
     61 (3)
    • ↵* Pleural, adrenal, ovarium, mesentery/pelvic.

    • ↵† Including everolimus and sunitinib.

    • ↵‡ Including chemoembolization, radioembolization, and radiofrequency ablation.

    • Data are number followed by percentage in parentheses, unless otherwise indicated (n = 37 total patients).

    • View popup
    TABLE 2.

    Association Between Baseline 68Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT Parameters and Morphologic Lesion Outcome

    ParameterResponseLesions (n)MedianIQRP*Spearman ρP†
    SUVmaxR2118.714.7 to 24.20.71
    NR5918.614.8 to 25.4
    SUVmeanR2111.49.7 to 13.10.99
    NR5911.09.1 to 13.7
    Tumor-to-spleen ratioR161.30.8 to 1.90.030.04 (95% CI, −0.20 to 0.27)0.73
    NR541.81.3 to 2.7
    Tumor-to-blood ratioR2159.851.1 to 82.10.37
    NR5954.639.6 to 80.8
    SSTR TVR218.42.4 to 26.50.81
    NR597.63.9 to 20.9
    Total lesion SSTR expressionR218645 to 2270.81
    NR5910839 to 247
    • ↵* Grouped analysis using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

    • ↵† Spearman rank correlation.

    • R = responding lesion; NR = nonresponding lesion.

    • View popup
    TABLE 3.

    Association Between Relative Change in 68Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT Parameters After C1 from Baseline and Morphologic Lesion Outcome

    ParameterResponseLesions (n)MedianIQRP*Spearman ρP†
    SUVmaxR19−23%−33% to 0%0.48
    NR59−16%−33% to 0%
    SUVmeanR19−21%−39% to 3%0.29
    NR59−15%−29% to 5%
    Tumor-to-spleen ratioR14−32%−41% to −8%0.91
    NR54−30%−50% to −12%
    Tumor-to-blood ratioR19−18%−35% to 3%0.44
    NR59−16%−31% to 19%
    SSTR TVR19−9%−36% to 20%0.050.27 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.47)0.01
    NR5911%−8% to 27%
    Total lesion SSTR expressionR19−27%−46% to −3%0.010.32 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.51)0.004
    NR59−6%−24% to 11%
    • ↵* Grouped analysis using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

    • ↵† Spearman rank correlation.

    • R = responding lesion; NR = nonresponding lesion.

    • View popup
    TABLE 4.

    Correlation Between Tumor-Absorbed C1 Dose and Lesion Morphologic Outcome in All Lesions and in Size-Based Subgroups According to Primary NET Origin

    OriginLesions (n)Spearman ρP
    All lesions61−0.24 (−0.47 to 0.18)0.06
     Pancreatic20−0.35 (−0.69 to 0.11)0.12
     Small-intestinal310.11 (−0.26 to 0.46)0.53
     Colorectal10−0.89 (−0.97 to −0.60)<0.001
    Lesions < 22 mm27−0.07 (−0.45 to 0.33)0.72
     Pancreatic10−0.58 (−0.89 to 0.08)0.06
     Small-intestinal150.27 (−0.29 to 0.69)0.32
     Colorectal2*——
    Lesions ≥ 22 mm34−0.41 (−0.67 to −0.08)0.01
     Pancreatic10−0.13 (−0.70 to 0.54)0.71
     Small-intestinal16−0.08 (−0.57 to 0.44)0.75
     Colorectal8−0.92 (−0.99 to −0.61)<0.001
    • ↵* Insufficient for analysis.

    • Data in parentheses are 95% CIs. Size groups are based on longest axial diameter on baseline MRI or CT.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Supplemental Data

    Files in this Data Supplement:

    • Supplemental Data
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 65 (2)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 65, Issue 2
February 1, 2024
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Prediction of 177Lu-DOTATATE PRRT Outcome Using Multimodality Imaging in Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from a Prospective Phase II LUMEN Study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Prediction of 177Lu-DOTATATE PRRT Outcome Using Multimodality Imaging in Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from a Prospective Phase II LUMEN Study
Magdalena Mileva, Gwennaëlle Marin, Hugo Levillain, Carlos Artigas, Camille Van Bogaert, Clémentine Marin, Rachele Danieli, Amelie Deleporte, Simona Picchia, Konstantinos Stathopoulos, Christiane Jungels, Bruno Vanderlinden, Marianne Paesmans, Lieveke Ameye, Gabriela Critchi, Loubna Taraji-Schiltz, Chloe Velghe, Zéna Wimana, Maria Bali, Alain Hendlisz, Patrick Flamen, Ioannis Karfis
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Feb 2024, 65 (2) 236-244; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.265987

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Prediction of 177Lu-DOTATATE PRRT Outcome Using Multimodality Imaging in Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from a Prospective Phase II LUMEN Study
Magdalena Mileva, Gwennaëlle Marin, Hugo Levillain, Carlos Artigas, Camille Van Bogaert, Clémentine Marin, Rachele Danieli, Amelie Deleporte, Simona Picchia, Konstantinos Stathopoulos, Christiane Jungels, Bruno Vanderlinden, Marianne Paesmans, Lieveke Ameye, Gabriela Critchi, Loubna Taraji-Schiltz, Chloe Velghe, Zéna Wimana, Maria Bali, Alain Hendlisz, Patrick Flamen, Ioannis Karfis
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Feb 2024, 65 (2) 236-244; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.123.265987
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Visual Abstract
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • DISCLOSURE
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Multicycle Dosimetric Behavior and Dose-Effect Relationships in [177Lu]Lu-DOTATATE Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy
  • Patient-Specific Dosimetry-Driven PRRT: Time to Move Forward!
  • Dosimetry of [177Lu]Lu-DOTATATE in Patients with Advanced Midgut Neuroendocrine Tumors: Results from a Substudy of the Phase III NETTER-1 Trial
  • Dosimetry Software for Theranostic Applications: Current Capabilities and Future Prospects
  • The Translation of Dosimetry into Clinical Practice: What It Takes to Make Dosimetry a Mandatory Part of Clinical Practice
  • Quantitative SPECT/CT Metrics in Early Prediction of [177Lu]Lu-DOTATATE Treatment Response in Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Patients
  • Absorbed Dose-Response Relationship in Patients with Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Treated with [177Lu]Lu-DOTATATE: One Step Closer to Personalized Medicine
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • First-in-Human Study of 18F-Labeled PET Tracer for Glutamate AMPA Receptor [18F]K-40: A Derivative of [11C]K-2
  • Detection of HER2-Low Lesions Using HER2-Targeted PET Imaging in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Paired HER2 PET and Tumor Biopsy Analysis
  • [11C]Carfentanil PET Whole-Body Imaging of μ-Opioid Receptors: A First in-Human Study
Show more Clinical Investigation

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • 68Ga-DOTATATE
  • neuroendocrine tumors
  • peptide receptor radionuclide therapy
  • response prediction
  • dosimetry
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire