Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Risk assessment in liposarcoma patients based on FDG PET imaging

  • Original article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Tumor grade and subtype are considered standard parameters for risk assessment in patients with liposarcoma. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical value of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET-derived maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) for prediction of outcome in liposarcoma patients.

Methods

18F-FDG PET was performed in 54 patients with liposarcoma prior to therapy. SUVmax was calculated for each tumor and results were correlated with tumor grade, subtype, and relapse-free survival.

Results

SUVmax ranged from 0.4 to 15.9 (mean 3.6) and was significantly lower in grade I than in grade II and grade III tumors. SUVmax was 2.3±1.7, 3.5±1.5, 4.8±2.5, and 5.6±5.8 in well-differentiated, myxoid/round cell, dedifferentiated, and pleomorphic subtypes, respectively. Borderline differences (p=0.059) were found between tumor SUVmax in patients with and without relapse. Using a SUV of 3.6 as cut-off, the accuracy in predicting a relapse was 75%. Tumor grade yielded a lower accuracy for predicting relapse (50%), as did tumor subtype (35%). In Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, patients with a SUVmax >3.6 had a significantly shorter disease-free survival of 21 months compared with 44 months in patients with a SUVmax ≤3.6. Tumor grading and tumor subtype did not yield significant differences.

Conclusion

Pretherapy tumor SUV obtained by FDG PET imaging was a more useful parameter for risk assessment in liposarcoma than tumor grade or subtype. A SUVmax of more than 3.6 resulted in a significantly reduced disease-free survival and identified patients at high risk for developing early local recurrences or metastatic disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hasegawa T, Yamamoto S, Yokoyama R, Umeda T, Matsuno Y, Hirohashi S. Prognostic significance of grading and staging systems using MIB-1 score in adult patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities and trunk. Cancer 2002;95:843–851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Peiper M, Zurakowski D, Schwarz R, Weh HJ, Zornig C. Survival in patients with primary soft-tissue sarcomas treated within 6 years. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 1998;124:199–206

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Nijhuis PH, Sars PR, Plaat BE, Molenaar WM, Sluiter WJ, Hoekstra HJ. Clinico-pathological data and prognostic factors in completely resected AJCC stage I–III liposarcomas. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7:535–543

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Chang HR, Hajdu SI, Collin C, Brennan MF. The prognostic value of histologic subtypes in primary extremity liposarcoma. Cancer 1989;64:1514–1520

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Zagars GK, Goswitz MS, Pollack A. Liposarcoma: outcome and prognostic factors following conservation surgery and radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996;36:311–319

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dei Tos AP. Liposarcoma: new entities and evolving concepts. Ann Diagn Pathol 2000;4:252–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fletcher CD. The histological features of local recurrences of soft tissue sarcomas. Pathologe 1994;15:196–200

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Allal AS, Dulguerov P, Allaoua M, Haenggeli CA, El-Ghazi el A, Lehmann W, et al. Standardized uptake value of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in predicting outcome in head and neck carcinomas treated by radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:1398–1404

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Graham MM, Peterson LM, Hayward RM. Comparison of simplified quantitative analyses of FDG uptake. Nucl Med Biol 2000;27:647–655

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Higashi K, Ueda Y, Ayabe K, Sakurai A, Seki H, Nambu Y, et al. FDG PET in the evaluation of the aggressiveness of pulmonary adenocarcinoma: correlation with histopathological features. Nucl Med Commun 2000;21:707–714

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dhital K, Saunders CA, Seed PT, O’Doherty MJ, Dussek J. [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and its prognostic value in lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2000;18:425–428

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Eary JF, O’Sullivan F, Powitan Y, Chandhury KR, Vernon C, Bruckner JD, et al. Sarcoma tumor FDG uptake measured by PET and patient outcome: a retrospective analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1149–1154

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Brenner W, Conrad EU, Eary JF. FDG PET imaging for grading and prediction of outcome in chondrosarcoma patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:189–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Trojani M, Contesso G, Coindre JM, Rouesse J, Bui NB, de Mascarel A, et al. Soft-tissue sarcomas of adults; study of pathological prognostic variables and definition of a histopathological grading system. Int J Cancer 1984;33:37–42

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. DeGrado TR, Turkington TG, Williams JJ, Stearns CW, Hoffman JM, Coleman RE, et al. Performance characteristics of a whole-body PET scanner. J Nucl Med 1994;35:1398–1406

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lewellen TK, Kohlmeyer S, Miyaoka R, Schubert S, Stearns C. Investigation of the count rate performance of the General Electric Advance positron emission tomograph. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1995;42:1051–1057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pearlstone DB, Pisters PW, Bold RJ, Feig BW, Hunt KK, Yasko AW, et al. Patterns of recurrence in extremity liposarcoma: implications for staging and follow-up. Cancer 1999;85:85–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by NIH grants R01-CA65537 and S10 RR17229.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Winfried Brenner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brenner, W., Eary, J.F., Hwang, W. et al. Risk assessment in liposarcoma patients based on FDG PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33, 1290–1295 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-006-0170-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-006-0170-y

Keywords

Navigation