Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Radiology 5/2020

Open Access 01-05-2020 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Oncology

Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT tumor markers outperform MRI-based markers for the prediction of lymph node metastases in primary endometrial cancer

Authors: Kristine E. Fasmer, Ankush Gulati, Julie A. Dybvik, Sigmund Ytre-Hauge, Øyvind Salvesen, Jone Trovik, Camilla Krakstad, Ingfrid S. Haldorsen

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 5/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI tumor markers for prediction of lymph node metastases (LNM) and aggressive disease in endometrial cancer (EC).

Methods

Preoperative whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT and pelvic MRI were performed in 215 consecutive patients with histologically confirmed EC. PET/CT-based tumor standardized uptake value (SUVmax and SUVmean), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and PET-positive lymph nodes (LNs) (SUVmax > 2.5) were analyzed together with the MRI-based tumor volume (VMRI), mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADCmean), and MRI-positive LN (maximum short-axis diameter ≥ 10 mm). Imaging parameters were explored in relation to surgicopathological stage and tumor grade. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated yielding optimal cutoff values for imaging parameters, and regression analyses were used to assess their diagnostic performance for prediction of LNM and progression-free survival.

Results

For prediction of LNM, MTV yielded the largest area under the ROC curve (AUC) (AUC = 0.80), whereas VMRI had lower AUC (AUC = 0.72) (p = 0.03). Furthermore, MTV > 27 ml yielded significantly higher specificity (74%, p < 0.001) and accuracy (75%, p < 0.001) and also higher odds ratio (12.2) for predicting LNM, compared with VMRI > 10 ml (58%, 62%, and 9.7, respectively). MTV > 27 ml also tended to yield higher sensitivity than PET-positive LN (81% vs 50%, p = 0.13). Both VMRI > 10 ml and MTV > 27 ml were significantly associated with reduced progression-free survival.

Conclusions

Tumor markers from 18F-FDG PET/CT outperform MRI markers for the prediction of LNM. MTV > 27 ml yields a high diagnostic performance for predicting aggressive disease and represents a promising supplement to conventional PET/CT reading in EC.

Key Points

• Metabolic tumor volume (MTV) outperforms other 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI markers for preoperative prediction of lymph node metastases (LNM) in endometrial cancer patients.
• Using cutoff values for tumor volume for prediction of LNM, MTV > 27 ml yielded higher specificity and accuracy than V MRI > 10 ml.
• MTV represents a promising supplement to conventional PET/CT reading for predicting aggressive disease in EC.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68:394–424CrossRef Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68:394–424CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F et al (2015) ESMO-ESGOESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Radiother Oncol 117:559–581CrossRef Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F et al (2015) ESMO-ESGOESTRO Consensus Conference on Endometrial Cancer: diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Radiother Oncol 117:559–581CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Creasman W (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105:109CrossRef Creasman W (2009) Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 105:109CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F et al (2008) Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:1707–1716CrossRef Benedetti Panici P, Basile S, Maneschi F et al (2008) Systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy vs. no lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial carcinoma: randomized clinical trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:1707–1716CrossRef
5.
go back to reference ASTEC study group, Kitchener H, Swart AM, Qian Q, Amos C, Parmar MK (2009) Efficacy of systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study. Lancet 373:125–136CrossRef ASTEC study group, Kitchener H, Swart AM, Qian Q, Amos C, Parmar MK (2009) Efficacy of systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer (MRC ASTEC trial): a randomised study. Lancet 373:125–136CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Naumann RW (2012) The role of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: was the ASTEC trial doomed by design and are we destined to repeat that mistake? Gynecol Oncol 126:5–11CrossRef Naumann RW (2012) The role of lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer: was the ASTEC trial doomed by design and are we destined to repeat that mistake? Gynecol Oncol 126:5–11CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN et al (1987) Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer 60:2035–2041PubMed Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN et al (1987) Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Cancer 60:2035–2041PubMed
8.
go back to reference Bendifallah S, Genin AS, Naoura I et al (2012) A nomogram for predicting lymph node metastasis of presumed stage I and II endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 207:197.e1–197.e8CrossRef Bendifallah S, Genin AS, Naoura I et al (2012) A nomogram for predicting lymph node metastasis of presumed stage I and II endometrial cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol 207:197.e1–197.e8CrossRef
9.
go back to reference AlHilli MM, Podratz KC, Dowdy SC et al (2013) Risk-scoring system for the individualized prediction of lymphatic dissemination in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 131:103–108CrossRef AlHilli MM, Podratz KC, Dowdy SC et al (2013) Risk-scoring system for the individualized prediction of lymphatic dissemination in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer. Gynecol Oncol 131:103–108CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Todo Y, Sakuragi N, Nishida R et al (2003) Combined use of magnetic resonance imaging, CA 125 assay, histologic type, and histologic grade in the prediction of lymph node metastasis in endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:1265–1272CrossRef Todo Y, Sakuragi N, Nishida R et al (2003) Combined use of magnetic resonance imaging, CA 125 assay, histologic type, and histologic grade in the prediction of lymph node metastasis in endometrial carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:1265–1272CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Lee JY, Jung DC, Park SH et al (2010) Preoperative prediction model of lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20:1350–1355PubMed Lee JY, Jung DC, Park SH et al (2010) Preoperative prediction model of lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 20:1350–1355PubMed
12.
go back to reference Kang S, Kang WD, Chung HH et al (2012) Preoperative identification of a low-risk group for lymph nodemetastasis in endometrial cancer: a Korean gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 30:1329–1334CrossRef Kang S, Kang WD, Chung HH et al (2012) Preoperative identification of a low-risk group for lymph nodemetastasis in endometrial cancer: a Korean gynecologic oncology group study. J Clin Oncol 30:1329–1334CrossRef
13.
go back to reference KoskasM FM, Vanderstraeten A et al (2016) Evaluation of models to predict lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer: a multicentre study. Eur J Cancer 61:52–60CrossRef KoskasM FM, Vanderstraeten A et al (2016) Evaluation of models to predict lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer: a multicentre study. Eur J Cancer 61:52–60CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Korkmaz V, Meydanli MM, Yalcin I et al (2017) Comparison of three different risk-stratification models for predicting lymph node involvement in endometrioid endometrial cancer clinically confined to the uterus. J Gynecol Oncol 28:e78CrossRef Korkmaz V, Meydanli MM, Yalcin I et al (2017) Comparison of three different risk-stratification models for predicting lymph node involvement in endometrioid endometrial cancer clinically confined to the uterus. J Gynecol Oncol 28:e78CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Boyraz G, Atalay FO, Salman MC et al (2018) Comparison of Mayo and Milwaukee risk stratification models for predicting lymph node metastasis in endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 28:869–874CrossRef Boyraz G, Atalay FO, Salman MC et al (2018) Comparison of Mayo and Milwaukee risk stratification models for predicting lymph node metastasis in endometrial Cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 28:869–874CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Brugger S, Hamann M, Mosner M et al (2018) Endometrial cancer how many patients could benefit from sentinel lymph node dissection? World J Surg Oncol 16:95CrossRef Brugger S, Hamann M, Mosner M et al (2018) Endometrial cancer how many patients could benefit from sentinel lymph node dissection? World J Surg Oncol 16:95CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Geppert B, Lönnerfors C, Bollino M, Persson J (2018) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer-feasibility, safety and lymphatic complications. Gynecol Oncol 148:491–498CrossRef Geppert B, Lönnerfors C, Bollino M, Persson J (2018) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in endometrial cancer-feasibility, safety and lymphatic complications. Gynecol Oncol 148:491–498CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Haldorsen IS, Salvesen HB (2016) What is the best preoperative imaging for endometrial cancer? Curr Oncol Rep 18:1–11CrossRef Haldorsen IS, Salvesen HB (2016) What is the best preoperative imaging for endometrial cancer? Curr Oncol Rep 18:1–11CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Kakhki VRD, Shahriari S, Treglia G et al (2013) Diagnostic performance of fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging for detection of primary lesion and staging of endometrial cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23:1536–1543CrossRef Kakhki VRD, Shahriari S, Treglia G et al (2013) Diagnostic performance of fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging for detection of primary lesion and staging of endometrial cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Int J Gynecol Cancer 23:1536–1543CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Husby JA, Reitan BC, Biermann M et al (2015) Metabolic tumor volume on 18F-FDG PET/CT improves preoperative identification of high-risk endometrial carcinoma patients. J Nucl Med 56:1191–1198CrossRef Husby JA, Reitan BC, Biermann M et al (2015) Metabolic tumor volume on 18F-FDG PET/CT improves preoperative identification of high-risk endometrial carcinoma patients. J Nucl Med 56:1191–1198CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Bollineni VR, Ytre-Hauge S, Bollineni-Balabay O et al (2016) High diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in endometrial cancer:systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Nucl Med 57:879–885CrossRef Bollineni VR, Ytre-Hauge S, Bollineni-Balabay O et al (2016) High diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in endometrial cancer:systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Nucl Med 57:879–885CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Atri M, Zhang Z, Dehdashti F et al (2017) Utility of PET/CT to evaluate retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis in high-risk endometrial cancer: results of ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 trial. Radiology 283:450–459CrossRef Atri M, Zhang Z, Dehdashti F et al (2017) Utility of PET/CT to evaluate retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis in high-risk endometrial cancer: results of ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 trial. Radiology 283:450–459CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Gee MS, Atri M, Bandos AI et al (2018) Identification of distant metastatic disease in uterine cervical and endometrial cancers with FDG PET/CT: analysis from the ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 multicenter trial. Radiology 287:176–184CrossRef Gee MS, Atri M, Bandos AI et al (2018) Identification of distant metastatic disease in uterine cervical and endometrial cancers with FDG PET/CT: analysis from the ACRIN 6671/GOG 0233 multicenter trial. Radiology 287:176–184CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Kim HJ, Cho A, Yun M et al (2016) Comparison of FDG PET/CT and MRI in lymph node staging of endometrial cancer. Ann Nucl Med 30:104–113CrossRef Kim HJ, Cho A, Yun M et al (2016) Comparison of FDG PET/CT and MRI in lymph node staging of endometrial cancer. Ann Nucl Med 30:104–113CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Ytre-Hauge S, Husby JA, Magnussen IJ et al (2015) Preoperative tumor size at MRI predicts deep myometrial invasion, lymph node metastases, and patient outcome in endometrial carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Cancer 25:459–466CrossRef Ytre-Hauge S, Husby JA, Magnussen IJ et al (2015) Preoperative tumor size at MRI predicts deep myometrial invasion, lymph node metastases, and patient outcome in endometrial carcinomas. Int J Gynecol Cancer 25:459–466CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Shim S-H, Kim D-Y, Lee D-Y et al (2014) Metabolic tumour volume and total lesion glycolysis, measured using preoperative 18F–FDG PET/CT, predict the recurrence of endometrial cancer. BJOG 121:1097–1106CrossRef Shim S-H, Kim D-Y, Lee D-Y et al (2014) Metabolic tumour volume and total lesion glycolysis, measured using preoperative 18F–FDG PET/CT, predict the recurrence of endometrial cancer. BJOG 121:1097–1106CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, WJG O et al (2015) FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:328–354CrossRef Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, WJG O et al (2015) FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:328–354CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT tumor markers outperform MRI-based markers for the prediction of lymph node metastases in primary endometrial cancer
Authors
Kristine E. Fasmer
Ankush Gulati
Julie A. Dybvik
Sigmund Ytre-Hauge
Øyvind Salvesen
Jone Trovik
Camilla Krakstad
Ingfrid S. Haldorsen
Publication date
01-05-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 5/2020
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06622-w

Other articles of this Issue 5/2020

European Radiology 5/2020 Go to the issue