Langenhoff BS, Oyen WJG, Jager GJ, Strijk SP, Wobbes T, Corstens FHM, Ruers TJMEfficacy of fluorine-18-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in detecting tumor recurrence after local ablative therapy for liver metastases: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 20(22): 4453-4458
Department of Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nymegen, Gelderland, Netherlands Journal of Clinical Oncology
(Impact Factor: 18.43).
12/2002; 20(22):4453-8. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2002.12.134
The aims of this prospective study were to investigate the potential role of fluorine-18-deoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in determining the efficacy of the local tumor ablative process and to determine the added value of FDG-PET in the detection of tumor recurrence during follow-up.
Twenty-three patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases were followed up after local ablative therapy consisting of a standard protocol including FDG-PET scanning, computed tomography (CT) scanning, and carcinoembryonic antigen measurements. The mean follow-up period was 16 months (range, 10 to 21 months).
Ninety-six lesions was treated, 56 by local ablative treatment. Within 3 weeks after local ablative treatment, 51 lesions became photopenic on FDG-PET, while five lesions (in five patients) showed persistent activity on FDG-PET. In four of five FDG-PET-positive lesions, a local recurrence developed during follow-up; one FDG-PET-positive lesion turned out to be an abscess. None of the FDG-PET-negative lesions developed a local recurrence during a mean follow-up period of 16 months. During follow-up, 11 patients showed recurrence in the liver outside of the treated area. In all cases, previously negative FDG-PET scans became positive. Extrahepatic recurrence was encountered in nine patients during follow-up; FDG-PET showed all nine cases of tumor recurrence. There was one false-positive FDG-PET caused by an intra-abdominal abscess. In all patients, the time point of detection of recurrence by FDG-PET was considerably earlier than the detection by CT.
FDG-PET seems to have a significant impact in measuring treatment efficacy directly after local ablative therapy. Furthermore, FDG-PET has an added value in patient follow-up because it reveals recurrences earlier than conventional diagnostic modalities.
Available from: Martijn R Meijerink
- "Due to the visualization of increased glucose metabolism in tumour cells, fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is a useful tool in the assessment of treatment response following RFA
[6,9]. Ablated lesions that show focal FDG uptake in or within 1 cm of the ablated area are considered clinically suspect for LTP
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) may result in local progression, which generally appear within a year of treatment. As the timely diagnosis of this progression allows potentially curative local treatment, an optimal follow-up imaging strategy is essential. PET-MRI is a one potential imaging modality, combining the advantages of PET and MRI. The aim of this study is evaluate fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG) PET-MRI as a modality for detection of local tumor progression during the first year following thermal ablation, as compared to the current standard, FDG PET-CT. The ability of FDG PET-MRI to detect new intrahepatic lesions, and the extent to which FDG PET-MRI alters clinical management, inter-observer variability and patient preference will also be included as secondary outcomes.
BMC Medical Imaging 08/2014; 14(1):27. DOI:10.1186/1471-2342-14-27 · 1.31 Impact Factor
Available from: Wim P Ceelen
- "Nowadays, there is growing interest in the role of FDG-PET/CT for the prediction of tumour response to treatment, as metabolic alterations in tumour cells may occur before alterations in tumour size. Several studies indicated a possible role for FDG- PET/CT in the prediction and evaluation of treatment response (Langenhoff et al, 2002; Donckier et al, 2003; Dimitrakopoulou- Strauss et al, 2004; Guillem et al, 2004; Cascini et al, 2006; de Geus-Oei et al, 2008). "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to assess the role of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for evaluation of response to chemotherapy and bevacizumab and for prediction of progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with potentially resectable liver lesions.
A total of 19 mCRC patients were treated with FOLFOX/FOLFIRI and bevacizumab followed by surgery. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and FDG-PET/CT were performed before treatment and after cycle 5. PET results were quantified by calculating maximum standardised uptake value (SUV(max)) whereas area under the enhancement curve (AUC), initial AUC (iAUC) and the endothelial transfer constant (K(trans)) were used to quantify DCE-MRI. Pathological analysis of the resection specimen was performed, including measurement of microvessel density (MVD) and proliferation index.
Both AUC and iAUC were significantly decreased following bevacizumab therapy (median change of 22% (P=0.002) and 40% (P=0.001) for AUC and iAUC, respectively). Progression-free survival benefit was shown for patients with >40% reduction in K(trans) (P=0.019). In the group of radiological responders, the median baseline SUV(max) was 3.77 (IQR: 2.88-5.60) compared with 7.20 (IQR: 4.67-8.73) in nonresponders (P=0.021). A higher follow-up SUV(max) was correlated with worse PFS (P=0.012). Median MVD was 10.9. Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in patients with an MVD greater than 10, compared with patients with lower MVD (10 months compared with 16 months, P=0.016).
High relative decrease in K(trans), low follow-up SUV(max) and low MVD are favourable prognostic factors for mCRC patients treated with bevacizumab before surgery.
British Journal of Cancer 05/2012; 106(12):1926-33. DOI:10.1038/bjc.2012.184 · 4.84 Impact Factor
Available from: Owen J O'Connor
- "FDG-PET appears to accurately monitor the local efficacy of RFA for treatment of liver metastases, as it recognizes incomplete tumor ablation earlier than detectable on CT. Langenhoff et al. reported similar findings but we consider comparison of the PET findings with CT essential and should preferably be performed as part of a PET-CT examination . These studies support the use of FDG PET in combination with CT scan in the follow-up of RF ablated colorectal metastases and PET-CT may lead to earlier detection of tumor recurrence than conventional imaging modalities. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer, accounting for 53,219 deaths in 2007 and an estimated 146,970 new cases in the USA during 2009. The combination of FDG PET and CT has proven to be of great benefit for the assessment of colorectal cancer. This is most evident in the detection of occult metastases, particularly intra- or extrahepatic sites of disease, that would preclude a curative procedure or in the detection of local recurrence. FDG PET is generally not used for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer although there are circumstances where PET-CT may make the initial diagnosis, particularly with its more widespread use. In addition, precancerous adenomatous polyps can also be detected incidentally on whole-body images performed for other indications; sensitivity increases with increasing polyp size. False-negative FDG PET findings have been reported with mucinous adenocarcinoma, and false-positive findings have been reported due to inflammatory conditions such as diverticulitis, colitis, and postoperative scarring. Therefore, detailed evaluation of the CT component of a PET/CT exam, including assessment of the entire colon, is essential.
International Journal of Surgical Oncology 07/2011; 2011(1):846512. DOI:10.1155/2011/846512
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.