Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-2150-4130
Combined morphologic-metabolic biomarkers from [18F]FDG-PET/CT stratify prognostic groups in low-risk NSCLC
Kombinierte morphologisch-metabolische Biomarker der [18F]FDG-PET/CT stratifiziert nach Prognosegruppen in Low-risk-NSCLC-Patienten
Abstract
Aim The aim of this study was to derive prognostic parameters from 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ([18F]FDG-PET/CT) in patients with low-risk NSCLC and determine their prognostic value.
Methods 81 (21 female, mean age 66 a) therapy-naive patients that underwent [18F]FDG-PET/CT before histologic confirmation of NSCLC with stadium I and II between 2008–2016 were included. A mean follow-up time of 58 months (13–176), overall and progression free survival (OS, PFS) were registered. A volume of interest for the primary tumor was defined on PET and CT images. Parameters SUVmax, PET-solidity, PET-circularity, and CT-volume were analyzed. To evaluate the prognostic value of each parameter for OS, a minimum p-value approach was used to define cutoff values, survival analysis, and log-rank tests were performed, including subgroup analysis for combinations of parameters.
Results Mean OS was 58±28 months. Poor OS was associated with a tumor CT-volume >14.3 cm3 (p=0.02, HR=7.0, CI 2.7–17.7), higher SUVmax values >12.2 (p=0.003; HR=3.0, CI 1.3–6.7) and PET-solidity >0.919 (p=0.004; HR=3.0, CI 1.0–8.9). Combined parameter analysis revealed worse prognosis in larger volume/high SUVmax tumors compared to larger volume/lower SUVmax (p=0.028; HR=2.5, CI 1.1–5.5), high PET-solidity/low volume (p=0.01; HR=2.4, CI 0.8–6.6) and low SUVmax/high PET-solidity (p=0.02, HR=4.0, CI 0.8–19.0).
Conclusion Even in this group of low-risk NSCLC patients, we identified a subgroup with a significantly worse prognosis by combining morphologic-metabolic biomarkers from [18F]FDG-PET/CT. The combination of SUVmax and CT-volume performed best. Based on these preliminary data, future prospective studies to validate this combined morphologic-metabolic imaging biomarker for potential therapeutic decisions seem promising.
Publication History
Received: 23 May 2023
Accepted after revision: 04 August 2023
Article published online:
11 September 2023
© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
-
References
- 1 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE. et al. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022; 72: 7-33 DOI: 10.3322/caac.21708. (PMID: 35020204)
- 2 Didkowska J, Wojciechowska U, Mańczuk M. et al. Lung cancer epidemiology: contemporary and future challenges worldwide. Ann Transl Med 2016; 4: 150 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2016.03.11. (PMID: 27195268)
- 3 Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E. et al. Cancer statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 2005; 55: 10-30 DOI: 10.3322/canjclin.55.1.10. (PMID: 15661684)
- 4 Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aisner DL. et al. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2021. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2021; 19: 254-266 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0013. (PMID: 33668021)
- 5 Scagliotti GV, Fossati R, Torri V. et al. Randomized study of adjuvant chemotherapy for completely resected stage I, II, or IIIA non-small-cell Lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95: 1453-1461 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djg059. (PMID: 14519751)
- 6 Waller D, Peake MD, Stephens RJ. et al. Chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: the surgical setting of the Big Lung Trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004; 26: 173-182 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.03.041.
- 7 Arriagada R, Dunant A, Pignon J-P. et al. Long-term results of the international adjuvant lung cancer trial evaluating adjuvant Cisplatin-based chemotherapy in resected lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 35-42 DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.2272. (PMID: 19933916)
- 8 Isaacs J, Stinchcombe TE. Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Early-Stage Non-small-Cell Lung Cancer. Drugs 2022; 82: 855-863 DOI: 10.1007/s40265-022-01721-3. (PMID: 35596880)
- 9 Ettinger DS, Wood DE, Aisner DL. et al. Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 2022; 20: 497-530 DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2022.0025. (PMID: 35545176)
- 10 Weikert T, Jaeger PF, Yang S. et al. Automated lung cancer assessment on 18F-PET/CT using Retina U-Net and anatomical region segmentation. Eur Radiol 2023; DOI: 10.1007/s00330-022-09332-y.
- 11 Hannequin P, Decroisette C, Kermanach P. et al. FDG PET and CT radiomics in diagnosis and prognosis of non-small-cell lung cancer. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2022; 11: 2051-2063 DOI: 10.21037/tlcr-22-158. (PMID: 36386457)
- 12 Zhao CK, Ren TT, Yin YF. et al. A Comparative Analysis of Two Machine Learning-Based Diagnostic Patterns with Thyroid Imaging Reporting and Data System for Thyroid Nodules: Diagnostic Performance and Unnecessary Biopsy Rate. Thyroid 2021; 31: 470-481
- 13 Onozato Y, Iwata T, Uematsu Y. et al. Predicting pathological highly invasive lung cancer from preoperative [18F]FDG PET/CT with multiple machine learning models. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2023; 50: 715-726 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-022-06038-7.
- 14 Manafi-Farid R, Askari E, Shiri I. et al. [18F]FDG-PET/CT Radiomics and Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer: Technical Aspects and Potential Clinical Applications. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine 2022; 52: 759-780 DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2022.04.004. (PMID: 35717201)
- 15 Monaco L, De Bernardi E, Bono F. et al. The “digital biopsy” in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a pilot study to predict the PD-L1 status from radiomics features of [18F]FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022; 49: 3401-3411 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-022-05783-z.
- 16 Qiao J, Zhang X, Du M. et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT radiomics nomogram for predicting occult lymph node metastasis of non-small cell lung cancer. Front Oncol 2022; 12: 974934 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.974934.
- 17 Tong H, Sun J, Fang J. et al. A Machine Learning Model Based on PET/CT Radiomics and Clinical Characteristics Predicts Tumor Immune Profiles in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Multicohort Study. Front Immunol 2022; 13: 859323 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.859323. (PMID: 35572597)
- 18 Dondi F, Albano D, Bellini P. et al. Prognostic role of baseline 18F-FDG pet/CT in stage I and stage ii non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Imaging 2023; 94: 71-78 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2022.11.014.
- 19 Cheng R, Bernardo M, Senseney J. et al. Segmentation and surface reconstruction model of prostate MRI to improve prostate cancer diagnosis. In: 2013 IEEE 10th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging. San Francisco, CA, USA: IEEE; 2013: 185-189
- 20 McAuliffe MJ, Lalonde FM, McGarry D. et al. Medical Image Processing, Analysis and Visualization in clinical research. In: Proceedings 14th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems. CBMS 2001. Bethesda, MD, USA: IEEE Comput. Soc; 2001: 381-386
- 21 Miller R, Siegmund D. Maximally Selected Chi Square Statistics. Biometrics 1982; 38: 1011 DOI: 10.2307/2529881.
- 22 Lausen B, Schumacher M. Maximally Selected Rank Statistics. Biometrics 1992; 48: 73 DOI: 10.2307/2532740.
- 23 Corica F, De Feo MS, Stazza ML. et al. Qualitative and Semiquantitative Parameters of 18F-FDG-PET/CT as Predictors of Malignancy in Patients with Solitary Pulmonary Nodule. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15: 1000 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15041000.
- 24 Weir-McCall JR, Harris S, Miles KA. et al. Impact of solitary pulmonary nodule size on qualitative and quantitative assessment using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT: the SPUTNIK trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 1560-1569 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-05089-y. (PMID: 33130961)
- 25 Evangelista L, Cuocolo A, Pace L. et al. Performance of FDG-PET/CT in solitary pulmonary nodule based on pre-test likelihood of malignancy: results from the ITALIAN retrospective multicenter trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018; 45: 1898-1907 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-018-4016-1.
- 26 Hicks RJ. The Value of the Standardized Uptake Value (SUV) and Metabolic Tumor Volume (MTV) in Lung Cancer. Semin Nucl Med 2022; 52: 734-744 DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2022.04.007. (PMID: 35624032)
- 27 Kandathil A, Kay FU, Butt YM. et al. Role of FDG PET/CT in the Eighth Edition of TNM Staging of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Radiographics 2018; 38: 2134-2149 DOI: 10.1148/rg.2018180060. (PMID: 30422775)
- 28 Zhuang F, Haoran E, Huang J. et al. Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT uptake values in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2023; 178: 20-27 DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2023.02.001.
- 29 Liu J, Dong M, Sun X. et al. Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Surgical Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0146195 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0146195. (PMID: 26727114)
- 30 Im H-J, Pak K, Cheon GJ. et al. Prognostic value of volumetric parameters of (18)F-FDG PET in non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 241-251 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-014-2903-7. (PMID: 25193652)
- 31 Domachevsky L, Groshar D, Galili R. et al. Survival Prognostic Value of Morphological and Metabolic variables in Patients with Stage I and II Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Eur Radiol 2015; 25: 3361-3367 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3754-8.
- 32 Anwar H, Vogl TJ, Abougabal MA. et al. The value of different 18F-FDG PET/CT baseline parameters in risk stratification of stage I surgical NSCLC patients. Ann Nucl Med 2018; 32: 687-694 DOI: 10.1007/s12149-018-1301-9.
- 33 Dondi F, Gatta R, Albano D. et al. Role of Radiomics Features and Machine Learning for the Histological Classification of Stage I and Stage II NSCLC at [18F]FDG PET/CT: A Comparison between Two PET/CT Scanners. J Clin Med 2022; 12: 255 DOI: 10.3390/jcm12010255.