Prognostic Value of FDG-PET, Based on the Revised Response Criteria, in Patients with Malignant Lymphoma: A Comparison with CT/MRI Evaluations, Based on the International Working Group/ Cotswolds Meeting Criteria

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Nuclear Medicine and Tracer Kinetics, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine

2 Department of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine

3 Department of Hematology and Oncology , Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine

4 Department of Molcular Imaging in Medicine,Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine

5 Immunology Frontier Research Center, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan

Abstract

Objective(s): Post-treatment evaluations by CT/MRI (based on the International Working Group/ Cotswolds meeting guidelines) and PET (based on Revised Response Criteria), were examined in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with malignant lymphoma (ML).
Methods: 79 patients, undergoing CT/MRI for the examination of suspected lesions and whole-body PET/CT before and after therapy, were included in the study during April 2007-January 2013. The relationship between post-treatment evaluations (CT/MRI and PET) and PFS during the follow-up period was examined, using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. The patients were grouped according to the histological type into Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and other histological types. The association between post-treatment evaluations (PET or PET combined with CT/ MRI) and PFS was examined separately. Moreover, the relationship between disease recurrence and serum soluble interleukin-2 receptor, lactic dehydrogenase, and C-reactive protein levels was evaluated before and after the treatment.
Results: Patients with incomplete remission on both CT/MRI and PET had a significantly shorter PFS, compared to patients with complete remission on both CT/MRI and PET and those exhibiting incomplete remission on CT/MRI and complete remission on PET (P<0.001). Post-treatment PET evaluations were strongly correlated with patient outcomes in cases with HL or DLBCL (P<0.01) and other histological types (P<0.001). In patients with HL or DLBCL, incomplete remission on both CT/MRI and PET was associated with a significantly shorter PFS, compared to patients with complete remission
on both CT/MRI and PET (P<0.05) and those showing incomplete remission on CT/MRI and complete  remission on PET (P<0.01). In patients with other histological types, incomplete remission on both CT/MRI and PET was associated with a significantly shorter PFS, compared to cases with complete remission on both CT/MRI and PET (P<0.001). None of the serum parameters differed significantly between recurrent and non-recurrent cases.
Conclusion: Post-treatment PET evaluations were well correlated with the outcomes of patients with ML, exhibiting FDG uptake. Among patients with HL or DLBCL, a post-treatment complete remission on PET was predictive of a relatively long PFS. For predicting the prognosis of patients with other histological types, a
combination of CT/MRI and PET, rather than PET alone, is recommended.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B, Shipp MA, Fisher RI, Connors JM, et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non- Hodgkin's lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(4):1244-53.
2. Lister TA, Crowther D, Sutcliffe SB, Glatstein E, Canellos GP, Young RC, et al. Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin’s disease: Cotswolds meeting. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7(11):1630–6.
3. Weber WA. Assessing tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(Suppl 1):1-10.
4. Hutchings M, Barrington SF. PET/CT for therapy response assessment in lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:(Suppl 1):21-30.
5. Moog F, Bangerter M, Diederichs CG, Guhlmann A, Merkle E, Frickhofen N, et al. Extranodal malignant lymphoma: detection with FDG PET versus CT. Radiology. 1998;206(2):475-81.
6. Stumpe KD, Urbinelli M, Steinert HC, Glanzmann C, Buck A, von Schulthess GK. Whole-body positron emission tomography using fluorodeoxyglucose for staging of lymphoma: effectiveness and comparison with computed tomography. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25(7):721-8.
7. Newman JS, Francis IR, Kaminski MS, Wahl RL. Imaging of lymphoma with PET with 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: correlation with CT. Radiology. 1994;190(1):111-6.
8. Buchmann I, Reinhardt M, Elsner K, Bunjes D, Altehoefer C, Finke J, et al. 2-(fluorine-18) fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma. A bicentertrial.Cancer. 2001;91(5):889-99.
9. Rhodes MM, Delbeke D, Whitlock JA, Martin W, Kuttesch JF, Frangoul HA, et al. Utility of FDG-PET/CT in follow-up of children treated for Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol.2006;28(5):300-6.
10. Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Direct comparison of FDG PET and CT findings in patients with lymphoma: initial experience. Radiology.2005;237(3):1038-45.
11. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, Ritchie JM, Menda Y, Wooldridge JE, et al. Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography.J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(21):4652-61.
12. Isasi CR, Lu P, Blaufox MD. A metaanalysis of 18F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the staging and restaging of patients with lymphoma. Cancer. 2005;104(5):1066-74.
13. Gallamini A. Positron emission tomography scanning: a new paradigm for the management of Hodgkin's lymphoma. Haematologica. 2010;95(7):1046-8.
14. Isohashi K, Tatsumi M, Higuchi I, Inoue A, Nakajo K, Ishikawa J, et al. 18F-FDG-PET in patients with malignant lymphoma having long-term followup: staging and restaging, and evaluation of treatment response and recurrence. Ann Nucl Med. 2008;22(9):795-802.
15. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, Gascoyne RD, Specht L, Horning SJ, et al. Revised ResponseCriteria for Malignant Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):579-86.
16. Lavely WC, Delbeke D, Greer JP, Morgan DS, Byrne DW, Price RR, et al. FDG PET in the follow-up management of patients with newly diagnosed Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma after firstline chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57(2):307-15.
17. Jerusalem G, Warland V, Najjar F, Paulus P, Fassotte MF, Fillet G, et al. Whole-body 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of patients with Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Nucl Med Commun. 1999;20(1):13-20.
18. Zinzani PL, Stefoni V, Tani M, Fanti S, Musuraca G, Castellucci P, et al. Role of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the followup of lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(11):1781-7.
19. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, Mottaghy FM, Dietlein M, Guermazi A, 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(5):571-8.
20. Pyo J, Won Kim K, Jacene HA, Sakellis CG, Brown JR, Van den Abbeele AD. End-Therapy Positron EmissionTomography for Treatment Response Assessment in FollicularLymphoma: A SystematicReview and Meta-analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(23):1–12.
21. Goto N, Tsurumi H, Goto H, Shimomura YI, Kasahara S, Hara T, et.al. Serum soluble interleukin-2 receptor (sIL-2R) level is associated with the outcome of patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP regimens. Ann Hematol. 2012;91(5):705-14.
22. Shimomura Y, Tsurumi H, Sawada M, Yamada T, Hara T, Fukuno K, et.al. Clinical significance of serum soluble interleukin-2 receptor level in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. RinshoKetsueki.1999;40(8):639-45.
23. Yoshizato T, Nannya Y, Imai Y, Ichikawa M, Kurokawa M. Clinical significance of serum-soluble interleukin-2 receptor in patients with follicular lymphoma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2013;13(4):410-6.
24. Wieland A, Kerbi R, Berqhold A, Schwinger W, Mann G, Urban C.C-reactive protein (CRP) as tumor marker in pediatric and adolescent patients with Hodgkin disease. Med Pediatr Oncol. 2003;41(1):21-5.
25. Bakhshi S, Radhakrishnan V, Sharma P, Kumar R, Thulkar S, Vishnubhatla S, et al. Pediatric nonlymphoblastic non-Hodgkin lymphoma: baseline, interim, and posttreatment PET/CT versus contrast-enhanced CT for evaluation--a prospective study. Radiology. 2012;262(3):956-68.
26. Kelly KM, Hodgson D, Appel B, Chen L, Cole PD, Horton T, et al. Children's Oncology Group's 2013 blueprint for research: Hodgkin lymphoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2013;60(6):972-8.
27. Baba S, Abe K, Isoda T, Maruoka Y, Sasaki M, Honda H. Impact of FDG-PET/CT in the management of lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med. 2011;25(10):701-16.
28. Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, Hutchins GD, Weber B, Cody R. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11(11):2101–11.
29. Zijlstra JM, Lindauer-van der Werf G, Hoekstra OS, Hooft L, Riphagen II, Huijgens PC.18F-fluorodeoxyglucose
positron emission tomography for post-treatment evaluation of malignant lymphoma: a systematic review. Haematologica. 2006;91(4):522-9.
30. Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(6):932-45.
31. Srinivas SM, Dhurairaj T, Basu S, Bural G, Surti S, Alavi A. A recovery coefficient method for partial volume correction of PET images. Ann Nucl Med.2009;23(4):341-8.
32. Lu Z, Lin M, Downe P, Chong S, Ling S. The prognostic value of mid- and post-treatment [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in indolent follicular lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med.2014;28(8):805-11.
33. Lopci E, Zanoni L, Chiti A, Fonti C, Santi I, Zinzani PL, et al. FDGPET/CT predictive role in follicular lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39(5):864-71.
34. Alcantara M, Dupuis J, Mareschal S, Julian A, Cottereau AS, Becker S, et al. PET/CT before autologous stem cell transplantation predicts outcome in refractory/relapsed follicular lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;
42(2):215-21.
35. Bodet-Milin C, Eugène T, Gastinne T, Frampas E, Le Gouill S, Kraeber-Bodéré F. FDG-PET in Follicular Lymphoma Management.J Oncol. 2012;2012:370272.
36. Wu X, Pertovaara H, Korkola P, Vornanen M, Järvenpää R, Dastidar P, et al. Early interim PET/CT predicts post-treatment response in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Acta Oncol. 2014;53(8):1093-9.
37. Tatsumi M, Sugahara H, Higuchi I, Fukunaga H, Nakamura H, Kanakura Y, et al. Standardized uptake value on FDG-PET as a marker for disease activity in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: comparison with serum soluble interleukin-2 receptor values. Int J Clin Oncol. 2009;14(2):150-8.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics