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

Tumor Asphericity in FDG PET Is an Independent Prognostic Parameter Improving Risk Stratification in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Patrick Hausmann, Sebastian Zschaeck, Christian Furth, Pavel Nikulin, Paulina Cegla, Siyer Roohani, Elia Lombardo, Joanna Kazmierska, Nathalie L. Albert, Adrien Holzgreve, Iosif Strouthos, Claus Belka, Guillaume Landry, Witold Cholewinski, Jorg Kotzerke, Michael Baumann, Mechthild Krause, Daniel Zips, Jörg van den Hoff and Frank Hofheinz
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2025, 66 (5) 686-691; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.124.268972
Patrick Hausmann
1Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sebastian Zschaeck
1Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany;
2BIH Charité (Junior) Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, BIH Biomedical Innovation Academy, Berlin, Germany;
3Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany;
4German Cancer Consortium, partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany;
5OncoRay–National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden–Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christian Furth
6Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Pavel Nikulin
7Institute of Radiopharmaceutical Cancer Research, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden–Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Paulina Cegla
8Department of Nuclear Medicine, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznan, Poland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Siyer Roohani
1Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany;
2BIH Charité (Junior) Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, BIH Biomedical Innovation Academy, Berlin, Germany;
9German Cancer Consortium, partner site Berlin, a partnership between DKFZ and Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Elia Lombardo
10Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joanna Kazmierska
11Electroradiology Department, University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland;
12Radiotherapy Department II, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznan, Poland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nathalie L. Albert
13Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Adrien Holzgreve
13Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Iosif Strouthos
14Department of Radiation Oncology, German Oncology Center, European University Cyprus, Limassol, Cyprus;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Claus Belka
10Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany;
15Bavarian Cancer Research Center, partner site Munich, Munich, Germany;
16German Cancer Consortium, partner site Munich, Munich, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Guillaume Landry
10Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany;
15Bavarian Cancer Research Center, partner site Munich, Munich, Germany;
17German Cancer Consortium, partner site Munich, a partnership between DKFZ and LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Witold Cholewinski
8Department of Nuclear Medicine, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, Poznan, Poland;
11Electroradiology Department, University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jorg Kotzerke
18Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael Baumann
5OncoRay–National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden–Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany;
19Division of Radiooncology/Radiobiology, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mechthild Krause
3Department of Radiotherapy and Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany;
4German Cancer Consortium, partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany;
5OncoRay–National Center for Radiation Research in Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden–Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany;
20National Center for Tumor Diseases, partner site Dresden, Dresden, Germany, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany, and Helmholtz Association/Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden–Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany;
21Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Institute of Radiooncology, Dresden, Germany; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Zips
1Department of Radiation Oncology, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany;
4German Cancer Consortium, partner site Dresden, and German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany;
9German Cancer Consortium, partner site Berlin, a partnership between DKFZ and Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany;
22National Tumor Center Berlin, partner site Berlin, Berlin, Germany, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany, Charité Comprehensive Cancer, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany, Berlin Institute of Health, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany, and Max-Delbrück-Centrum für Molekulare Medizin, Helmholtz Association, Berlin, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jörg van den Hoff
7Institute of Radiopharmaceutical Cancer Research, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden–Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany;
15Bavarian Cancer Research Center, partner site Munich, Munich, Germany;
16German Cancer Consortium, partner site Munich, Munich, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frank Hofheinz
7Institute of Radiopharmaceutical Cancer Research, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden–Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany;
  • 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

Visual Abstract

Figure
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Abstract

Tumor asphericity in 18F-FDG PET is a prognostic marker that has been investigated in small pilot studies of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Here, we investigated the prognostic role of asphericity in a large multicenter database of patients with HNSCC treated with primary radiotherapy or chemoradiation and assessed its independent prognostic value. Methods: In total, 1,104 patients were included in this analysis. All received pretreatment 18F-FDG PET scans. Clinical risk factors were evaluated, and quantitative PET parameters SUVmax, metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis, and asphericity were calculated. Primary study endpoints were overall survival (OS) and locoregional control (LRC). Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed. Additionally, asphericity was combined with the best-established quantitative PET parameter of MTV, and the combinatory approach of using asphericity and MTV was compared with the use of only asphericity or MTV by bootstrap analyses. Results: Asphericity showed only a modest correlation with the established PET parameters of MTV, SUVmax, and total lesion glycolysis. On univariate testing asphericity was strongly associated with the outcome of patients (LRC and OS with P < 0.001). In multivariate testing of all imaging parameters that were not highly correlated, both MTV and asphericity showed a significant association with LRC (P < 0.001 for MTV and P = 0.021 for asphericity) and OS (P < 0.001 for MTV and asphericity). Asphericity and MTV were binarized and combined for risk stratification, and the prognostic value of the combination was compared with the prognostic value of individual parameters. Bootstrapping revealed significantly better performance by the combinatory approach when compared with MTV (P = 0.012 for LRC and P < 0.001 for OS) and asphericity with regard to OS (P < 0.001) but not for LRC (P = 0.53). Conclusion: We were able to show that asphericity bears independent prognostic value and significantly improves risk stratification when combined with MTV in a comprehensive retrospective cohort of HNSCC patients.

  • head and neck squamous cell carcinoma
  • FDG PET
  • radiotherapy
  • asphericity
  • metabolic tumor volume

Footnotes

  • Published online Mar. 13, 2025.

  • © 2025 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.
View Full Text

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

SNMMI members

SNMMI Member Login

Login to the site using your SNMMI member credentials

Individuals

Non-Member Login

Login as an individual user

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 66 (5)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 66, Issue 5
May 1, 2025
  • 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.
Tumor Asphericity in FDG PET Is an Independent Prognostic Parameter Improving Risk Stratification in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
(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
Tumor Asphericity in FDG PET Is an Independent Prognostic Parameter Improving Risk Stratification in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Patrick Hausmann, Sebastian Zschaeck, Christian Furth, Pavel Nikulin, Paulina Cegla, Siyer Roohani, Elia Lombardo, Joanna Kazmierska, Nathalie L. Albert, Adrien Holzgreve, Iosif Strouthos, Claus Belka, Guillaume Landry, Witold Cholewinski, Jorg Kotzerke, Michael Baumann, Mechthild Krause, Daniel Zips, Jörg van den Hoff, Frank Hofheinz
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2025, 66 (5) 686-691; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.124.268972

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Tumor Asphericity in FDG PET Is an Independent Prognostic Parameter Improving Risk Stratification in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Patrick Hausmann, Sebastian Zschaeck, Christian Furth, Pavel Nikulin, Paulina Cegla, Siyer Roohani, Elia Lombardo, Joanna Kazmierska, Nathalie L. Albert, Adrien Holzgreve, Iosif Strouthos, Claus Belka, Guillaume Landry, Witold Cholewinski, Jorg Kotzerke, Michael Baumann, Mechthild Krause, Daniel Zips, Jörg van den Hoff, Frank Hofheinz
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2025, 66 (5) 686-691; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.124.268972
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
    • ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • [18F]FDG PET/CT Predicts Patient Survival in Patients with Systemic Sclerosis–Associated Interstitial Lung Disease
  • Whole-Body [18F]DPA-714 Kinetic Assessment Using PET/CT Scanner with Long Axial Field of View
  • Clinical Outcomes of 177Lu-DOTATATE Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy in Patients with Skeletal Metastases from Neuroendocrine Tumors: Insights from Real-World Experience
Show more Clinical Investigation

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • head and neck squamous cell carcinoma
  • FDG PET
  • radiotherapy
  • asphericity
  • metabolic tumor volume
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire