Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Correlation between therapy response assessment using FDG PET/CT and histopathologic tumor regression grade in hepatic metastasis of colorectal carcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the correlation between change in FDG uptake before and after chemotherapy in hepatic metastases of colorectal carcinoma (HCRC) and a histopathologic tumor regression grade (TRG).

Methods

In patients with HCRC, PET/CT data prior to hepatic surgery were retrospectively analyzed under an IRB waiver. The maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) was measured before and after chemotherapy. The relative change of FDG activity in the identified lesions was calculated (dSUV). Histopathological specimens of resected metastases were graded on a 5-score TRG scale. A TRG of 1–3 was rated as a responding to therapy, whereas TRG 4–5 were regarded as non-responding lesions.

Results

31 lesions were identified in 23 patients. Mean SUVmax before and after therapy was 6.9 ± 3.7 and 3.5 ± 1.8, respectively. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve revealed a conclusive correlation between TRG and dSUV (AUC 0.773; 95 % confidence interval 0.599–0.946) with a cut off at 41 % decrease in FDG activity yielding a sensitivity and specificity of 72 and 75 %, respectively.

Conclusion

A relative change in FDG activity (dSUV) of more than 41 % decrease correlated significantly with histopathological tumor regression and might be a prognostic tool for response to chemotherapy in HCRC.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lordick F, Ruers T, Aust DE, Collette L, Downey RJ, El Hajjam M, et al. European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Gastrointestinal Group: Workshop on the role of metabolic imaging in the neoadjuvant treatment of gastrointestinal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:1807–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Venook A. Critical evaluation of current treatments in metastatic colorectal cancer. Oncologist. 2005;10:250–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Adam R, Delvart V, Pascal G, Valeanu A, Castaing D, Azoulay D, et al. Rescue surgery for unresectable colorectal liver metastases downstaged by chemotherapy: a model to predict long-term survival. Ann Surg. 2004;240:644–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Alberts SR, Horvath WL, Sternfeld WC, Goldberg RM, Mahoney MR, Dakhil SR, et al. Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin for patients with unresectable liver-only metastases from colorectal cancer: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:9243–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ruers TJ, Wiering B, van der Sijp JR, Roumen RM, de Jong KP, Comans EF, et al. Improved selection of patients for hepatic surgery of colorectal liver metastases with (18)F-FDG PET: a randomized study. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1036–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Monteil J, Mahmoudi N, Leobon S, Roudaut PY, El Badaoui A, Verbeke S, et al. Chemotherapy response evaluation in metastatic colorectal cancer with FDG PET/CT and CT scans. Anticancer Res. 2009;29:2563–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. de Geus-Oei LF, van Laarhoven HW, Visser EP, Hermsen R, van Hoorn BA, Kamm YJ, et al. Chemotherapy response evaluation with FDG-PET in patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:348–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, Herholz K, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma AA, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1773–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50.

  10. Capirci C, Rampin L, Erba PA, Galeotti F, Crepaldi G, Banti E, et al. Sequential FDG-PET/CT reliably predicts response of locally advanced rectal cancer to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1583–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gillham CM, Lucey JA, Keogan M, Duffy GJ, Malik V, Raouf AA, et al. (18)FDG uptake during induction chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer fails to predict histomorphological tumour response. Br J Cancer. 2006;95:1174–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Klaeser B, Nitzsche E, Schuller JC, Koberle D, Widmer L, Balmer-Majno S, et al. Limited predictive value of FDG-PET for response assessment in the preoperative treatment of esophageal cancer: results of a prospective multi-center trial (SAKK 75/02). Onkologie. 2009;32:724–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Palma P, Conde-Muino R, Rodriguez-Fernandez A, Segura-Jimenez I, Sanchez-Sanchez R, Martin-Cano J, et al. The value of metabolic imaging to predict tumour response after chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer. Radiat Oncol. 2010;5:119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lordick F, Ott K, Krause BJ, Weber WA, Becker K, Stein HJ, et al. PET to assess early metabolic response and to guide treatment of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction: the MUNICON phase II trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:797–805.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mandard AM, Dalibard F, Mandard JC, Marnay J, Henry-Amar M, Petiot JF, et al. Pathologic assessment of tumor regression after preoperative chemoradiotherapy of esophageal carcinoma. Cancer. 1994;73:2680–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Rubbia-Brandt L, Giostra E, Brezault C, Roth AD, Andres A, Audard V, et al. Importance of histological tumor response assessment in predicting the outcome in patients with colorectal liver metastases treated with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy followed by liver surgery. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:299–304.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Calvo FA, Domper M, Matute R, Martinez-Lazaro R, Arranz JA, Desco M, et al. 18F-FDG positron emission tomography staging and restaging in rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:528–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Capirci C, Rubello D, Chierichetti F, Crepaldi G, Fanti S, Mandoliti G, et al. Long-term prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer previously treated with neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187:W202–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC, Hany TF. Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions. Radiology. 2006;238:405–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fluss R, Faraggi D, Reiser B. Estimation of the Youden Index and its associated cutoff point. Biom J. 2005;47:458–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Findlay M, Young H, Cunningham D, Iveson A, Cronin B, Hickish T, et al. Noninvasive monitoring of tumor metabolism using fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer liver metastases: correlation with tumor response to fluorouracil. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:700–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S, Graham MM, Karp J, Lammertsma AA, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1059–66.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department Medical Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Ramistr. 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland

    Irene A. Burger, Andrei Samarin & Thomas F. Hany

  2. Institute of Surgical Pathology, Department of Pathology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Esther I. Schwarz & Achim Weber

  3. Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Stefan Breitenstein

Authors
  1. Irene A. Burger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Esther I. Schwarz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrei Samarin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stefan Breitenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Achim Weber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Thomas F. Hany
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Irene A. Burger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Burger, I.A., Schwarz, E.I., Samarin, A. et al. Correlation between therapy response assessment using FDG PET/CT and histopathologic tumor regression grade in hepatic metastasis of colorectal carcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy. Ann Nucl Med 27, 177–183 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-012-0670-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-012-0670-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation