高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

F-18-FDG PET Response After Induction Chemotherapy Can Predict Who Will Benefit from Subsequent Esophagectomy After Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

文献详情

资源类型:
机构: [1]Sun Yat Sen Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, State Key Lab Oncol South China, Canc Ctr,Collaborat Innovat Ctr Canc Med, Guangzhou, Guangdong, Peoples R China; [2]Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Unit 97,1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030 USA; [3]Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Cardiovasc & Thorac Surg, Houston, TX 77030 USA; [4]Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Gastrointestinal Med Oncol, Houston, TX 77030 USA
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: esophageal cancer induction chemotherapy chemoradiotherapy FDG-PET response prognosis

摘要:
This study aimed to determine whether F-18-FDG PET response after induction chemotherapy before concurrent chemoradiotherapy can identify patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma who may benefit from subsequent esophagectomy. Methods: We identified and analyzed 220 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma who had received induction chemotherapy before chemoradiotherapy, with or without surgery, with curative intent; all underwent F-18-FDG PET scanning before and after induction chemotherapy. F-18-FDG PET responders were defined as patients who achieved complete response (CR) after induction chemotherapy (maximum SUV <= 3.0). The predictive value of F-18-FDG PET response for patient outcomes was evaluated. Results: Overall, 86 patients had bimodality therapy (BMT; induction chemotherapy + chemoradiotherapy) and 134 had trimodality therapy (TMT; induction chemotherapy + chemoradiotherapy with surgery). Forty-eight patients (21.8%) achieved an F-18-FDG PET CR after induction chemotherapy. F-18-FDG PET CR was found to correlate with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in BMT patients. For TMT patients, F-18-FDG PET CR predicted pathologic response (P = 0.003) but not survival. Among F-18-FDG PET nonresponders, TMT patients had significantly better survival than did BMT patients (P < 0.001). However, among F-18-FDG PET responders, BMT patients had OS (P = 0.201) and PFS (P 5 0.269) similar to that of TMT patients. After propensity scorematched analysis, F-18-FDG PET responders treated with BMT versus TMT still had comparable OS and PFS, but TMT was associated with better locoregional control. Conclusion: F-18-FDG PET response to induction chemotherapy could be a useful imaging biomarker to identify patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma who could benefit from subsequent esophagectomy after chemoradiotherapy. Compared with BMT, TMT can significantly improve survival in F-18-FDG PET nonresponders. However, outcomes for F-18-FDG PET responders were similar after either treatment (BMT or TMT). Prospective validation of these findings is warranted.

基金:
语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2017]版:
大类 | 1 区 医学
小类 | 1 区 核医学
最新[2023]版:
大类 | 1 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 核医学
第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Sun Yat Sen Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, State Key Lab Oncol South China, Canc Ctr,Collaborat Innovat Ctr Canc Med, Guangzhou, Guangdong, Peoples R China;
通讯作者:
通讯机构: [2]Univ Texas MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Oncol, Unit 97,1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030 USA;
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:43370 今日访问量:0 总访问量:3120 更新日期:2024-09-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 四川省肿瘤医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:成都市人民南路四段55号