TABLE 4

Association Between PET/CT- and CT-Based Tumor Parameters and Survivals Using Cox Regression Model

OSDFSNRFS
VariableHR95% CIPHR95% CIPHR95% CIP
TNM classification
 T stage
  T1–2 vs. T3–42.681.27–5.640.013.631.75–7.500.0012.400.90–6.460.07
 N stage
  N1–2 vs. N31.400.36–4.500.711.340.4–4.030.601.250.21–3.010.56
  N1 vs. N2–31.020.40–2.620.981.090.44–2.740.851.430.38–5.400.60
CT-related parameters for MNN
 Central necrosis, no vs. yes2.591.13–5.260.023.621.79–7.35<0.00110.992.56–47.620.001
 Maximal diameter (cm), <2.4 vs. ≥2.41.240.48–3.270.662.160.78–6.010.141.800.55–5.920.34
 N-GTV (mL), <8.9 vs. ≥8.91.560.21–1.910.421.010.41–2.470.981.020.25–4.220.98
PET/CT-related parameters
 N-TLG40% (g), <38.0 vs. ≥38.0 g1.710.77–3.780.192.121.13–4.000.022.631.10–6.300.03
 N-SUVmax, <6.1 vs. ≥6.11.680.72–3.920.231.360.55–3.360.511.570.22–1.800.40
 N-MTV2.5 (mL), <3.0 vs. ≥3.01.620.75–3.500.221.200.57–2.560.641.190.51–2.750.69
 T-TLG40% (g), <53.3 vs. ≥53.31.090.47–2.090.971.750.71–4.320.221.720.70–4.240.24
 T-SUVmax, <10.7 vs. ≥10.71.390.61–3.220.431.550.58–4.090.381.670.64–4.330.29
 T-MTV2.5 (mL), <14.5 vs. ≥14.52.430.99–6.050.061.110.38–2.720.880.930.36–2.420.88
Primary tumor origin, oropharynx vs. hypopharynx1.110.56–2.170.770.990.47–2.130.990.980.46–2.090.95
  • T-TLG40% = pretreatment primary TLG defined by 40% of SUVmax; T-SUVmax = pretreatment maximum SUV of primary tumor; T-MTV2.5 = pretreatment primary metabolic tumor volume defined by SUV = 2.5.

  • This study used median values of T-SUVmax, T-MTVs, and T-TLGs as cutoff points.