SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Annals of Medical Research / 2021 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2

Prognostic value of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in primary tumor and reticuloendothelial system in patients with head and neck cancer

Fadime DEMİR
Pages
231–236
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The SUVmax value of primary tumor and age had a significant predictive value in terms of overall survival (p = 0.027 and p = 0.037, respectively).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of FDG uptake in primary tumor and reticuloendothelial system at 18 Fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography / computed tomography (18F-FDG PET / CT) in patients with head and neck cancer.Materials and Methods: A total of 56 head and neck cancer patients who underwent 18F-FDG PET / CT imaging in our clinic for staging were included in study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Bone marrow SUVmax was measured at Lumbal 3-5 th vertebraes.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The SUVmax value of primary tumor and age had a significant predictive value in terms of overall survival (p = 0.027 and p = 0.037, respectively).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of FDG uptake in primary tumor and reticuloendothelial system at 18 Fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography / computed tomography (18F-FDG PET / CT) in patients with head and neck cancer.Materials and Methods: A total of 56 head and neck cancer patients who underwent 18F-FDG PET / CT imaging in our clinic for staging were included in study. A circular volume of interest (VOI) was drawn which include tumor tissue on axial images and thereafter SUVmax value of the primary tumor was measured. Bone marrow SUVmax was measured at Lumbal 3-5 th vertebraes. Bone marrow-to-liver uptake ratio (BLR) value was calculated by dividing the bone marrow SUVmax value to liver SUVmax. Bone marrow-to-spleen uptake ratio (BSR) ratio value was calculated by dividing bone marrow SUVmax value to the spleen SUVmax.Results: Forty-five were male and 11 were female of the 56 patients included in the study. The average age was 62.71 ± 14.3. The SUVmax value of primary tumor and age had a significant predictive value in terms of overall survival (p = 0.027 and p = 0.037, respectively). There was a significant difference in overall survival when using 13.6 cut off for SUVmax and 65.5 cut off for age (p = 0.005, p = 0.019, respectively). Age (≥65.5), distant metastasis and SUVmax of primary tumor (≥13.6) values were independent prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis. The bone marrow SUVmax value and BLR and BSR ratios of the patients did not have a significant prognostic value in both univariate and multivariate analysis.Conclusion: The SUVmax value of the primary tumor in 18F-FDG PET / CT in patients with head and neck cancer, had both predictive and independent prognostic value. Bone marrow SUVmax, BLR and BSR values which shows FDG uptake on RES system, were not predictive and prognostic.

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİR, F. (2022). Prognostic value of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in primary tumor and reticuloendothelial system in patients with head and neck cancer. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2, 231–236. https://ajindex.com/articles/445752

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Cohen N, Fedewa S, Chen AY. Epidemiology and Demographics of the Head and Neck Cancer Population. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2018;30:381-95
  2. Rettig EM, D'Souza G. Epidemiology of head and neck cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015;24:379-96
  3. Chow LQM. Head and Neck Cancer. N Engl J Med 2020;382:60-72
  4. Seeburg DP, Baer AH, Aygun N. Imaging of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: From Staging to Surveillance. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 2018;30:421-33
  5. Goel R, Moore W, Sumer B, et al. Clinical Practice in PET/ CT for the Management of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017;209:289-303
  6. Kim SA, Roh JL, Kim JS, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT surveillance for the detection of recurrence in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Cancer 2017;72:62- 70
  7. Huang Y, Feng M, He Q, et al. Prognostic value of pretreatment 18F-FDG PET-CT for nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96: 6721
  8. Yoon HJ, Kim BS, Moon CM, et al. Prognostic value of diffuse splenic FDG uptake on PET/CT in patients with gastric cancer. PLoS One. 2018;13:0196110
  9. Bang JI, Yoon HJ, Kim BS. Clinical utility of FDG uptake within reticuloendothelial system on F-18 FDG PET/ CT for prediction of tumor recurrence in breast cancer. PLoS One. 2018;13:0208861
  10. Sahin E, Elboga U. Relationship between reticuloendothelial systems' FDG uptake level and clinicopathological features in patient with invasive ductal breast cancer. Radiol Med 2017;122:785-92
  11. Dolan RD, Laird BJA, Horgan PG, et al. The prognostic value of the systemic inflammatory response in randomised clinical trials in cancer: A systematic review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2018;132:130-7
  12. Lee JW, Ban MJ, Park JH, et al. Effect of F-18 Fluorodeoxyglucose Uptake by Bone Marrow on the Prognosis of Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. J Clin Med 2019;8:1169
  13. Szyszko TA, Cook GJR. PET/CT and PET/MRI in head and neck malignancy. Clin Radiol 2018;73:60-9
  14. Rohde M, Nielsen AL, Pareek M, et al. A PET/CT-Based Strategy Is a Stronger Predictor of Survival Than a Standard Imaging Strategy in Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2018;59:575-81
  15. Sheikhbahaei S, Ahn SJ, Moriarty E, et al. Intratherapy or Posttherapy FDG PET or FDG PET/CT for Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prognostic Studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;205:1102-13
  16. Huang Y, Feng M, He Q, et al. Prognostic value of pretreatment