The Effect of Metabolic PET Parameters on Survival Outcome in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 47 Sayı: 1, 16 - 23, 17.03.2020

Nadiye Akdeniz Mehmet Küçüköner Muhammet Ali Kaplan Zuhat Urakçı Oğur Karhan Halis Yerlikaya Şahin Laçin Halil Kömek Abdurrahman Işıkdoğan

https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.705798

Öz

Objective: 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (18F-FDG PET-CT) is one of the most valuable imaging types and tumor metabolic volume is another parameter that can be obtained from PET-CT. Our primary objective is to evaluate the effect of PET-CT metabolic parameters on survival in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).
Methods: A total of 29 patients with MPM had been evaluated with 18F-FDG PET-CT between January 2016 and December 2017. Metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), standardized uptake values (SUVmax) and TLG/liver SUVmean values were calculated. Also, effects of these parameters on survival rates were evaluated.
Results: Histological subtypes of the disease were determined as epithelioid (n=24), biphasic (n=3), sarcomatoid (n=2). Median overall survival was 255 days (21-903). Median MTV was 225 cm³ (10-1879), median TLG was 1056 g/ml*cm³ (36-18927), median SUVmax was 7.7 (1.5-20) and TLG/liver SUVmean ratio was 561.2 (14.9-8113.7). Sensitivity and specificity for MTV 113 cut-off value were 86.4% and 85.7%, respectively. Determined cut-off value for TLG was 419.5, sensitivity and specificity of the value were 81.8% and 85.7%, respectively. Additionally, determined cut-off value for TLG/liver SUVmean ratio was 107.4, the rate of sensitivity and specificity for this value were 95.5% and 71.4%, respectively. The patients with higher MTV, TLG and TLG/liver SUVmean had worse survival rate.
Conclusion: We confirmed significant association between MTV, TLG and TLG/liver SUVmean values and patients survival. These promising PET derived parameters can be used for evaluating treatment response and prognosis in MPM.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Malignant pleural mesothelioma, survival, FDG PET/CT

Kaynakça

• 1. Chapman A, Mulrennan S, Ladd B, Muers MF. Population-based Epidemiology and prognosis of mesothelioma in Leeds, UK. Thorax 2008;63:435-9.
• 2. Curran D, Sahmoud T, Therasse P, et al. Prognostic factors in patients with pleural mesothelioma: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer experience. J ClinOncol 1998;16:145-52.
• 3. Herndon JE, Green MR, Chahinian AP, Corson JM, Suzuki Y, Vogelzang NJ.Factorspredictive of survivalamong 337 patientswithmesotheliomatreatedbetween 1984 and 1994 bythecancerandLeukemiaGroup B. Chest 1998; 113:723-31.
• 4. Nowak AK, Armato SG, Ceresoli GL, et al. Imaging in pleural mesothelioma: a review of imaging research presented at the 9th International Meeting of the International Mesothelioma Interest Group. Lung Cancer 2010;70:1-6.
• 5. Abakay A, Komek H, Abakay O, et al. Relationship between 18 FDG PET-CT findings and survival of 177 patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Eur Rev Med PharmacolSci 2013;17:1233-41.
• 6. Francis RJ, Byrne MJ, van der Schaaf AA, et al. Early prediction of response to chemotherapy and survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma using a novel semiautomated 3-dimensional volume-based analysis of serial 18F-FDG PET scans. J Nucl Med 2007;48:1449-58.
• 7. Meignan M, Sasanelli M, Casasnovas RO, et al. Metabolic tumour volumes measured at staging in lymphoma: methodological evaluation on phantom experiments and patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014;41:1113-22.
• 8. Tanrıkulu Ç, Abakay Ö, Sezgi C, et al. Value of a new inflammatory parameter in malignant pleural mesotheliomaprognosis. Dicle Med J 2013; 40:241-4.
• 9. Nowak AK, Francis RJ, Phillips MJ, et al. A novel prognostic model for malignant mesothelioma incorporating quantitative FDG-PET imaging with clinical parameters. Clin Cancer Res 2010;16:2409-17.
• 10. Rusch VW, Venkatraman ES. Important prognostic factors in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, managed surgically. Ann ThoracSurg 1999;68:1799-804.
• 11. Pass HI, Temeck BK, Kranda K, Steinberg SM, Feuerstein IR. Preoperative tumor volume is associated with outcome in malignant pleural mesothelioma. J ThoracCardiovascSurg 1998;115:310-7.
• 12. Sugarbaker DJ, Strauss GM, Lynch TJ, et al. Node status has prognostic significance in the multimodality therapy of diffuse, malignant mesothelioma. J ClinOncol 1993;11:1172-8.
• 13. Benard F, Sterman D, Smith RJ, Kaiser LR, Albelda SM, Alavi A. Prognostic value of FDG PET imaging in malignant pleural mesothelioma. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1241-5.
• 14. Flores RM. The role of PET in the surgical management of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Lung Cancer 2005;49:27-32.
• 15. Flores RM, Akhurst T, Gonen M, et al. Positron emission tomography predicts survival in malignant pleural mesothelioma. J ThoracCardiovascSurg 2006;132:763-8.
• 16. Gerbaudo VH, Mamede M, Trotman-Dickenson B, Hatabu H, Sugarbaker DJ. FDG PET/CT patterns of treatment failure of malignant pleuralmesothelioma: relationship to histologic type, treatment algorithm, and survival. Eur J Nucl Med MolImag 2011;38:810-21.
• 17. Kitajima K, Doi H, Kuribayashi K, al. Prognostic value of pretreatment volume-based quantitative 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Eur J Radiol 2017;86:176-83.
• 18. Lee HY, Hyun SH, Lee KS, et al. Volume-based parameter of 18F-FDG PET/CT in malignant pleural mesothelioma: prediction of therapeutic response and prognostic implications. Annals SurgOncol 2010;17:2787-94.
• 19. Incerti E, Broggi S, Fodor A, et al. FDG PET-derived parameters as prognostic tool in progressive malignant pleural mesothelioma treated patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018;45:2071-8.
• 20. Zucali PA, Lopci E, Ceresoli GL, et al. Prognostic and predictive role of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) treated with up-front pemetrexed-based chemotherapy. Cancer Med 2017;6:2287-96.