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
. 2016 Jan;57(1):232-7.
doi: 10.3349/ymj.2016.57.1.232.

Relationship between Preoperative ¹⁸F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Uptake and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Status in Primary Colorectal Cancer

Affiliations

Relationship between Preoperative ¹⁸F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Uptake and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Status in Primary Colorectal Cancer

Yun Jung Choi et al. Yonsei Med J. 2016 Jan.

Abstract

Purpose: Both ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (¹⁸F-FDG) uptake and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) status are prognostic variables of colorectal cancer (CRC). The aim of this study was to investigate a possible association between ¹⁸F-FDG uptake on preoperative positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and EGFR status in primary CRC.

Materials and methods: Records of 132 patients (66 men and 66 women; mean age=67.1±11.1 years) who underwent ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT for CRC staging and subsequent bowel resection were reviewed. In primary lesions, ¹⁸F-FDG uptake was semiquantitatively evaluated in terms of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), and EGFR status was determined by immunohistochemistry. Associations of clinicopathological parameters and EGFR status were analyzed by Pearson's chi-square test, multiple logistic regression, and receiver operating characteristic curves.

Results: Eighty-six patients (65.2%) showed EGFR expression. SUVmax was significantly lower in EGFR-negative tumors than in EGFR-expressing tumors (10.0±4.2 vs. 12.1±2.1; p=0.012). It was the only significant parameter correlated with EGFR expression (odds ratio=2.457; relative risk=2.013; p=0.038). At the SUVmax threshold of 7.5, the sensitivity and specificity for predicting EGFR expression were 84.9% and 40.4%, respectively (area under the curve=0.624; p=0.019).

Conclusion: Preoperative ¹⁸F-FDG uptake is slightly correlated with EGFR status in primary CRC. Preoperative SUVmax of ¹⁸F-FDG may have a limited role in predicting EGFR expression in such tumors because of its poor specificity.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; epidermal growth factor receptor; ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Relationships of SUVmax, tumor size, and CEA level in primary CRC. (A) SUVmax showed a significant positive linear correlation with tumor size (r=0.293; p=0.001). (B) Tumor size and CEA level showed a significant positive linear correlation (r=0.253; p=0.003). (C) No correlation was noted between CEA level and SUVmax (r=0.151; p=0.083). SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CRC, colorectal cancer.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Relationship of SUVmax and EGFR status in primary CRC. EGFR-expressing tumors had higher SUVmax than EGFR-negative tumors. SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; CRC, colorectal cancer.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. ROC curves of SUVmax, tumor size, and CEA level for predicting EGFR expression in primary CRC. SUVmax: AUC=0.624, p=0.019; tumor size: AUC=0.506, p=0.909; CEA level: AUC=0.445, p=0.296. ROC, receiver operating characteristic; SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; CRC, colorectal cancer; AUC, area under the curve.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63:11–30. - PubMed
    1. Iyer RB, Silverman PM, DuBrow RA, Charnsangavej C. Imaging in the diagnosis, staging, and follow-up of colorectal cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:3–13. - PubMed
    1. Filippone A, Ambrosini R, Fuschi M, Marinelli T, Genovesi D, Bonomo L. Preoperative T and N staging of colorectal cancer: accuracy of contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT colonography--initial experience. Radiology. 2004;231:83–90. - PubMed
    1. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, Ghafoor A, Samuels A, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin. 2004;54:8–29. - PubMed
    1. Grizzle WE, Manne U, Jhala NC, Weiss HL. Molecular characterization of colorectal neoplasia in translational research. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2001;125:91–98. - PubMed

MeSH terms