Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting 2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Keep up to date with all the top stories and latest evidence with our hub page, including official congress videos and expert takeaways.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Skeletal Radiology
Published in: Skeletal Radiology 5/2014

01-05-2014 | Scientific Article

Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: comparisons between metabolic parameters

Authors: Sun-pyo Hong, Seung Eun Lee, Yoon-La Choi, Sung Wook Seo, Ki-Sun Sung, Hong Hoe Koo, Joon Young Choi

Published in: Skeletal Radiology | Issue 5/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To investigate the relationship between volume-based PET parameters and prognosis in patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 55 patients with pathologically proven STS who underwent pretreatment with 18 F-Fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET/CT. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), average SUV (SUVavg), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) of primary tumors were measured using a threshold SUV as liver activity for determining the boundary of tumors. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses for overall survival were performed according to the metabolic parameters and other clinical variables.

Results

Cancer-related death occurred in 19 of 55 patients (35 %) during the follow-up period (29 ± 23 months). On univariate analysis, AJCC stage (stage IV vs. I-III, hazard ratio (HR) = 2.837, p = 0.028), necrosis (G2 vs. G0-G1, HR = 3.890, p = 0.004), SUVmax (1 unit - increase, HR = 1.146, p = 0.008), SUVavg (1 unit - increase, HR = 1.469, p = 0.032) and treatment modality (non-surgical therapy vs. surgery, HR = 4.467, p = 0.002) were significant predictors for overall survival. On multivariate analyses, SUVmax (HR = 1.274, p = 0.015), treatment modality (HR = 3.353, p = 0.019) and necrosis (HR = 5.985, p = 0.006) were identified as significant independent prognostic factors associated with decreased overall survival.

Conclusions

The SUVmax of the primary tumor is a significant independent metabolic prognostic factor for overall survival in patients with STS. Volume-based PET parameters may not add prognostic information outside of the SUVmax.
Literature
1.
Coindre JM, Terrier P, Bui NB, et al. Prognostic factors in adult patients with locally controlled soft tissue sarcoma. A study of 546 patients from the French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:869–77.PubMed
2.
Ingmar I, Tobias W, Beate K, Torsten K. Oncological outcome and prognostic factors in the therapy of soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2012;4:e34.
3.
Carneiro A, Bendahl PO, Engellau J, et al. A prognostic model for soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities and trunk wall based on size, vascular invasion, necrosis, and growth pattern. Cancer. 2011;117:1279–87.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Sampo M, Tarkkanen M, Tukiainen E, et al. A web-based prognostic tool for extremity and trunk wall soft tissue sarcomas and its external validation. Br J Cancer. 2012;106:1076–82.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
5.
Gustafson P, Akerman M, Alvegard TA, et al. Prognostic information in soft tissue sarcoma using tumour size, vascular invasion and microscopic tumour necrosis-the SIN-system. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:1568–76.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480–508.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Johnson GR, Zhuang H, Khan J, Chiang SB, Alavi A. Roles of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-deoxyglucose in the detection of local recurrent and distant metastatic sarcoma. Clin Nucl Med. 2003;28:815–20.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Lucas JD, O’Doherty MJ, Wong JC, et al. Evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of soft-tissue sarcomas. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:441–7.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Roberge D, Vakilian S, Alabed YZ, Turcotte RE, Freeman CR, Hickeson M. FDG PET/CT in initial staging of adult soft-tissue sarcoma. Sarcoma. 2012;2012:960194.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
10.
Schwarzbach MH, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Willeke F, et al. Clinical value of [18-F]] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in soft tissue sarcomas. Ann Surg. 2000;231:380–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
11.
Fuglo HM, Jorgensen SM, Loft A, Hovgaard D, Petersen MM. The diagnostic and prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the initial assessment of high-grade bone and soft tissue sarcoma. A retrospective study of 89 patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:1416–24.PubMedCrossRef
12.
La TH, Filion EJ, Turnbull BB, et al. Metabolic tumor volume predicts for recurrence and death in head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;74:1335–41.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
13.
Leibold T, Akhurst TJ, Chessin DB, et al. Evaluation of 18F-FDG-PET for early detection of suboptimal response of rectal cancer to preoperative chemoradiotherapy: a prospective analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2783–9.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Xie P, Yue JB, Zhao HX, et al. Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET-CT metabolic index for nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2010;136:883–9.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Hyun SH, Choi JY, Shim YM, et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume measured by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:115–22.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Moon SH, Choi JY, Lee HJ, et al. Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the tonsil: comparisons of volume-based metabolic parameters. Head Neck. 2013;35:15–22.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging. The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging. 1999;2:159–71.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Choi ES, Ha SG, Kim HS, Ha JH, Paeng JC, Han I. Total lesion glycolysis by 18F-FDG PET/CT is a reliable predictor of prognosis in soft-tissue sarcoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1836–42.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Edge SB BD, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti III A, ed. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7th edn. New York: Springer, 2010: 291–298.
20.
de Jong PA, van Ufford HM, Baarslag HJ, et al. CT and 18F-FDG PET for noninvasive detection of splenic involvement in patients with malignant lymphoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:745–53.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Hatt M, Visvikis D, Albarghach NM, Tixier F, Pradier O, Cheze-le RC. Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET image-based parameters in oesophageal cancer and impact of tumour delineation methodology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1191–202.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the imaging subcommittee of international harmonization project in lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:571–8.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Meng X, Sun X, Mu D, et al. Noninvasive evaluation of microscopic tumor extensions using standardized uptake value and metabolic tumor volume in non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:960–6.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Rakheja R, Makis W, Tulbah R, et al. Necrosis on FDG PET/CT correlates with prognosis and mortality in Sarcomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201:170–7.PubMedCrossRef
25.
26.
Vallabhajosula S. (18)F-labeled positron emission tomographic radiopharmaceuticals in oncology: an overview of radiochemistry and mechanisms of tumor localization. Semin Nucl Med. 2007;37:400–19.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Adler LP, Blair HF, Makley JT, et al. Noninvasive grading of musculoskeletal tumors using PET. J Nucl Med. 1991;32:1508–12.PubMed
28.
Nieweg OE, Pruim J, van Ginkel RJ, et al. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging of soft-tissue sarcoma. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:257–61.PubMed
29.
Eary JF, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, et al. Quantitative [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in pretreatment and grading of sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;4:1215–20.PubMed
30.
Wong CY, Nunez R, Bohdiewicz P, et al. Patterns of abnormal FDG uptake by various histological types of non-small cell lung cancer at initial staging by PET. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:1702–5.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Huang T, Civelek AC, Li J, et al. Tumor microenvironment-dependent 18F-FDG, 18F-fluorothymidine, and 18F-misonidazole uptake: a pilot study in mouse models of human non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1262–8.PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
Behranwala KA, A’Hern R, Omar AM, Thomas JM. Prognosis of lymph node metastasis in soft tissue sarcoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:714–9.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: comparisons between metabolic parameters
Authors
Sun-pyo Hong
Seung Eun Lee
Yoon-La Choi
Sung Wook Seo
Ki-Sun Sung
Hong Hoe Koo
Joon Young Choi
Publication date
01-05-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Skeletal Radiology / Issue 5/2014
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-014-1832-7

Other articles of this Issue 5/2014

Skeletal Radiology 5/2014 Go to the issue

Meeting Review

International Skeletal Society outreach 2013: Rwanda

Scientific Article

Evaluation of a method for the assessment of anterior acetabular coverage and hip joint space width

Technical Report

Visualization of joint and bone using dual-energy CT arthrography with contrast subtraction: in vitro feasibility study using porcine joints

Scientific Article

How do radiologists evaluate osteonecrosis?

Scientific Article

Deltoid ligament in acute ankle injury: MR imaging analysis

Scientific Article

Comparison of [18 F]FDG PET/CT and MRI in the diagnosis of active osteomyelitis