[Early prediction of treatment response to high-dose chemotherapy in patients with relapsed germ cell tumors using [18F]FDG-PET, CT or MRI, and tumor marker]

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the ability of [(18)F]FDG-PET, CT/MRI and serum tumor marker (TM) for the early prediction of response in patients with metastatic germ cell tumors (GCT) undergoing salvage high-dose chemotherapy (HD-CTX).

Materials and methods: Before commencement of HD-CTX, 19 patients with metastases from GCT were evaluated with [(18)F]FDG-PET, CT or MRI and TM after 2-3 cycles of induction chemotherapy and the results compared with those of the baseline examinations. PET was analyzed visually and quantitatively by calculating the standard uptake value (SUV). CT or MRI was evaluated for changes in tumor size (progressive disease/stable disease PD/SD = viable lesion; partial remission/complete remission PR/CR = nonviable lesion), density or signal intensity, homogeneity and contrast enhancement. For the prognosis, the worse case, i.e., the most vital lesion detected in a patient, was considered. The reference standard was the result of the histology after resection of any residual masses (N = 10) and/or the clinical-radiological follow-up for at least 6 months after completion of the treatment (N = 9).

Results: Six of nineteen patients (32 %) remained progression-free for over 6 months following treatment, whereas 13 (68 %) progressed. The outcome of HD-CTX was correctly predicted by PET, CT and TM in 89 %, 67 % and 88 %, respectively. In 5 of 6 patients with successful HD-CTX, PET was negative (mean SUV = 1.8), with CT or MRI showing a partial regression of the tumor in 4 of 5 patients. Of the 13 patients not cured by HD-CTX, the PET data were positive in all (mean SUV = 2.7), and the CT/MRI results were true positive (PD or SD) in 8 and false negative (PR) in 5 patients. The combined assessment of CT and TM corrected 3 false negative prognoses and 1 false positive CT prognosis. Two patients with unfavorable outcome despite a favorable response by CT and TM criteria were exclusively identified by PET. The resultant sensitivities and specificities for the prediction of therapy response are as follows: PET 100% and 67%; CT/MRI 62% and 80%; TM 83% and 100%; CT+TM 85% and 83%.

Conclusion: FDG-PET has a high prognostic value for predicting the response to chemotherapy in patients with metastatic GCT early in the course of treatment and may improve patient selection for subsequent HD-CTX protocols. Especially in patients with response to induction chemotherapy according to CT or TM evaluation, PET offers additional information to detect patients with an overall unfavorable outcome.