Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jul;38(7):1191-202.
doi: 10.1007/s00259-011-1755-7. Epub 2011 Mar 2.

Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology

Mathieu Hatt  1 , Dimitris Visvikis, Nidal M Albarghach, Florent Tixier, Olivier Pradier, Catherine Cheze-le Rest
Affiliations
Free article

Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology

Mathieu Hatt et al. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011 Jul.
Free article

Abstract

Purpose: (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) image-derived parameters, such as standardized uptake value (SUV), functional tumour length (TL) and tumour volume (TV) or total lesion glycolysis (TLG), may be useful for determining prognosis in patients with oesophageal carcinoma. The objectives of this work were to investigate the prognostic value of these indices in oesophageal cancer patients undergoing combined chemoradiotherapy treatment and the impact of TV delineation strategies.

Methods: A total of 45 patients were retrospectively analysed. Tumours were delineated on pretreatment (18)F-FDG scans using adaptive threshold and automatic (fuzzy locally adaptive Bayesian, FLAB) methodologies. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(max)), SUV(peak), SUV(mean), TL, TV and TLG were computed. The prognostic value of each parameter for overall survival was investigated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models for univariate and multivariate analyses, respectively.

Results: Large differences were observed between methodologies (from -140 to +50% for TV). SUV measurements were not significant prognostic factors for overall survival, whereas TV, TL and TLG were, irrespective of the segmentation strategy. After multivariate analysis including standard tumour staging, only TV (p < 0.002) and TL (p = 0.042) determined using FLAB were independent prognostic factors.

Conclusion: Whereas no SUV measurement was a significant prognostic factor, TV, TL and TLG were significant prognostic factors for overall survival, irrespective of the delineation methodology. Only functional TV and TL derived using FLAB were independent prognostic factors, highlighting the need for accurate and robust PET tumour delineation tools for oncology applications.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Cancer. 2005 Oct 15;104(8):1620-6 - PubMed
    1. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2002 Sep;32(9):340-6 - PubMed
    1. J Nucl Med. 2007 Jan;48 Suppl 1:68S-77S - PubMed
    1. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Jan 1;73(1):136-41 - PubMed
    1. J Nucl Med. 2005 Aug;46(8):1342-8 - PubMed

Substances