Advertisement

Roles of posttherapy 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy

  • Feng-Yuan Liu
  • Tzu-Pei Su
  • Chun-Chieh Wang
  • Angel Chao
  • Hung-Hsueh Chou
  • Yu-Chen Chang
  • Tzu-Chen Yen
  • Chyong-Huey Lai
Original Article
  • 293 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the clinical roles of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) performed 2-3 months after completion of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), along with pretherapy characteristics, in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix enrolled in a prospective randomized clinical trial.

Methods

Posttherapy PET/CT in patients with advanced FIGO stage or positive pelvic or para-aortic lymph node (PALN) defined on pretherapy PET/CT was classified as positive, equivocal, or negative. Overall survival (OS) rates between patients with different PET/CT results are compared. Pretherapy characteristics are examined for association with posttherapy PET/CT results and for prognostic significance in patients with equivocal or negative PET/CT.

Results

PET/CT scans (n = 55) were positive, equivocal and negative in 9, 13 and 33 patients, respectively. All patients with positive scans were confirmed to have residual or metastatic disease and died despite salvage therapies. There is a significant OS difference between patients with positive and equivocal scans (P < .001) but not between patients with equivocal and negative scans (P = .411). Positive pretherapy PALN is associated with positive posttherapy PET/CT (P = .033) and predicts a poorer survival in patients with equivocal or negative posttherapy PET/CT (P < .001).

Conclusions

Positive PET/CT 2-3 months posttherapy implies treatment failure and novel therapy is necessary to improve outcomes for such patients. A more intense posttherapy surveillance may be warranted in patients with positive pretherapy PALN.

Keywords

18F-FDG PET/CT Advanced cervical cancer Concurrent chemoradiotherapy Posttherapy surveillance Prognosis 

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou (CMRPG381141 and CMRPG381142).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

We obtained informed consents from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Jaime P, Silvia F, Lynette D, Eduardo LP. Cancers of the female reproductive organs. In: Bernard WS, Christopher PW, editors. World Cancer Report 2014. Lyon: World Health Organization; 2014. p. 465-481.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chemoradiotherapy for Cervical Cancer Meta-Analysis Collaboration. Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 18 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:5802–12.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma. J Amer Med Assoc. 2007;298:2289–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Siva S, Deb S, Young RJ, Hicks RJ, Callahan J, Bressel M, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT following chemoradiation of uterine cervix cancer provides powerful prognostic stratification independent of HPV status: a prospective cohort of 105 women with mature survival data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1825–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scarsbrook A, Vaidyanathan S, Chowdhury F, Swift S, Cooper R, Patel C. Efficacy of qualitative response asessment interpretation criteria at 18F-FDG PET-CT for predcting outcome in locally advanced cervical carcinoma treated with chemoradiotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:581–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Elit L, Kennedy EB, Fyles A, Metser U. Follow-up for cervical cancer: a program in evidence-based care systematic review and clinical practice guideline update. Curr Oncol. 2016;23:109–18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marth C, Landoni F, Mahner S, McCormack M, Gonzalez-Martin A, Colombo N. Cervical cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28:iv72–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang CC, Chou HH, Yang LY, Lin H, Liou WS, Tseng CW, et al. A randomized trial comparing concurrent chemoradiotherapy with single-agent cisplatin versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced cervical cancer: an Asian gynecologic oncology group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;137:462–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu FY, Lai CH, Yang LY, Wang CC, Lin G, Chang CJ, et al. Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a parallel study of a prospective randomized trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1812–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Su TP, Lin G, Huang YT, Liu FY, Wang CC, Angel C, et al. Comparison of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for posttherapy evaluation in patients with advanced cervical cancer receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. Published online first: Nov 20, 2017.  https://doi.org/10.1007/S00259-017-3884-0.
  11. 11.
    Lai CH, Chang CJ, Huang HJ, Hsueh S, Chao A, Yang JE, et al. Role of human papillomavirus genotype in prognosis of early-stage cervical cancer undergoing primary surgery. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3628–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang CC, Lai CH, Huang HJ, Chao A, Chang CJ, Chang TC, et al. Clinical effect of human papillomavirus genotypes in patients with cervical cancer undergoing primary radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;78:1111–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hong JH, Tsai CS, Lai CH, Chang TC, Wang CC, Chou HH, et al. Recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of cervix after definitive radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60:249–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chang TC, Law KS, Hong JH, Lai CH, Ng KK, Hsueh S, et al. Positron emission tomography for unexplained elevation of serum squamous cell carcinoma antigen levels during follow-up for patients with cervical malignancies. Cancer. 2004;101:164–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brooks RA, Rader JS, Dehdashti F, Mutch DG, Powell MA, Thaker PH, et al. Surveillance FDG-PET detection of asymptomatic recurrences in patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112:104–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Borcoman E, Le Tourneau C. Pembrolizumab in cervical cancer: latest evidence and clinical usefulness. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2017;9:431–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. Metabolic response on post-therapy FDG-PET predicts patterns of failure after radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;83:185–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sanz-Viedma S, Torigian DA, Parsons M, Basu S, Alavi A. Potential clinical utility of dual time point FDG-PET for distinguishing benign from malignant lesions: implications for oncological imaging. Rev Esp Med Nucl. 2009;28:159–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Naganawa S, Yoshikawa T, Yasaka K, Maeda E, Hayashi N, Abe O. Role of delayed-time-point imaging during abdominal and pelvic cancer screening using FDG-PET/CT in the general population. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:e8832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3745–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hwang L, Bailey A, Lea J, Albuquerque K. Para-aortic nodal metastases in cervical cancer: a blind spot in the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics staging system: current diagnosis and management. Future Oncol. 2015;11:309–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Choi HJ, Ju W, Myung SK, Kim Y. Diagnostic performance of computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: meta-analysis. Cancer Sci. 2010;101:1471–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Feng-Yuan Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tzu-Pei Su
    • 3
  • Chun-Chieh Wang
    • 2
    • 4
  • Angel Chao
    • 2
    • 5
  • Hung-Hsueh Chou
    • 2
    • 5
  • Yu-Chen Chang
    • 1
    • 2
    • 6
  • Tzu-Chen Yen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chyong-Huey Lai
    • 2
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging CenterChang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and Chang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan
  2. 2.Gynecologic Cancer Research CenterChang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and Chang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan
  3. 3.Department of Nuclear MedicineKeelung Chang Gung Memorial HospitalKeelungTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of Radiation OncologyChang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and Chang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuanTaiwan
  5. 5.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyChang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou and Chang Gung University College of MedicineTaoyuan CountyTaiwan
  6. 6.Department of Medical Imaging and Radiological SciencesChang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan

Personalised recommendations