Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as an objective substitute for CT morphologic response criteria in patients undergoing chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases
The computed tomography (CT) morphologic response of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) after chemotherapy is reportedly correlated with pathologic response and survival outcomes of patients undergoing surgery. However, they are rather subjective criteria and not evaluable without adequate quality of contrast-enhanced CT images. This study sought the potential use of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) as an objective substitute for predicting pathological viability of CLM after chemotherapy.
Predictive ability of tumor viability of ≤10% was compared between FDG-PET/CT and contrast-enhanced CT in 34 patients who underwent curative surgical resection for CLM after chemotherapy. The CT morphology and response were defined according to the reported criteria (Chun YS, JAMA 2009).
The mean standard uptake value (SUV-mean) in CLM was significantly lower in patients with group 1 and group 2 CT morphology (median, 2.53 and 3.00, respectively) than in group 3 (median, 3.32). The tumor SUV-mean showed moderate correlation with the tumor pathologic viability (r = 0.660, P < 0.0001). A receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that both the tumor SUV-mean (area under the curve [AUC], 0.916; the cut-off value, 3.00) and the CT morphology (AUC, 0.882) have excellent predictive power for ≤10% of tumor viability, while degree of tumor shrinkage showed lower predictive power (AUC, 0.692).
FDG-PET shows significant correlation with pathologic viability of CLM after chemotherapy and may offer additional objective information for estimating tumor viability when the CT morphologic response is not evaluable.
KeywordsColorectal liver metastases Chemotherapy FDG-PET CT morphologic response Tumor viability
Compliance with ethical standards
This study was funded by JSPS KAKENHI (Grant No. 26861063).
Conflict of interest
The authors have no potential conflict of interest to disclose.
This study was performed in accordance with the ethical guidelines for clinical studies at Toranomon Hospital and the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards under approval of institutional review board (IRB).
Informed consent was waived for this retrospective study with appropriate review process by IRB and release of study protocol.
- 10.Manoharan V, et al. (2017) Serial imaging using [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and histopathologic assessment in predicting survival in a population of surgically resectable distal oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant therapy. Ann Nucl Med 31:315–323CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 12.Heosprbkgpj NV (2007) F18-FDG-PET evaluation of patients for resection of colorectal liver metastases. Hepatogastroenterology 54:1667–1671Google Scholar
- 16.Heinemann V, et al. (1990) Early tumour shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Eur J Cancer 2015(51):1927–1936Google Scholar