Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

FDG-PET status following chemoradiotherapy provides high management impact and powerful prognostic stratification in oesophageal cancer

  • Original article
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of FDG-PET following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on treatment planning and survival in patients with oesophageal cancer (OC).

Methods

Fifty-three consecutive OC patients had a post-treatment PET scan to evaluate tumour response to CRT prior to possible surgery. Baseline pre-CRT PET was performed in 33 patients. Prospectively recorded post-CRT management plans were compared with post-PET treatment. High impact was defined as a change in treatment intent or modality. Survival was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier product limit method and Cox proportional hazards regression model.

Results

After completion of CRT, 23/53 patients (43%) achieved complete metabolic response (CMR), as compared with only four (8%) with complete response on computed tomography. High PET impact was observed in 19 patients (36%). CMR was strongly predictive of survival (p<0.008) on multivariate analysis. CMR patients in whom resection was not performed had comparable survival to those (CMR and non-CMR) who underwent resection.

Conclusion

The use of post-treatment FDG-PET for assessment of tumour response after CRT changed the clinical management of more than one-third of OC patients. CMR status as assessed by PET powerfully stratified prognosis. Even in the absence of a baseline study, normalisation of uptake at all sites of known tumoral involvement carries a good medium-term prognosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Blot WJ, McLaughlin JK. The changing epidemiology of esophageal cancer. Semin Oncol 1999;26(5 Suppl 15):2–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Muller JM, Erasmi H, Stelzner M, Zieren U, Pichlmaier H. Surgical therapy of oesophageal carcinoma. Br J Surg 1990 77(8):845–857

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Geh JI. The use of chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer. Eur J Cancer 2002;38(2):300–313

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kaklamanos IG, Walker GR, Ferry K, Franceschi D, Livingstone AS. Neoadjuvant treatment for resectable cancer of the esophagus and the gastroesophageal junction: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10(7):754–761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Urschel JD, Vasan H. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery to surgery alone for resectable esophageal cancer. Am J Surg 2003;185(6):538–543

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Geh JI, Crellin AM, Glynne-Jones R. Preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg 2001;88(3):338–356

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Brown WA, Thomas J, Gotley D, Burmeister BH, Lim KH, Martin I, Reference Use of oesophagogastroscopy to assess the response of oesophageal carcinoma to neoadjuvant therapy. Br J Surg 2004;91(2):199–204

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Jones DR, Detterbeck FC, Egan TM, Parker LA Jr, Bernard SA, Tepper JE. Induction chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy in patients with carcinoma of the esophagus. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;64(1):185–91; discussion 191–192

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Jones DR, Parker LA Jr, Detterbeck FC, Egan TM. Inadequacy of computed tomography in assessing patients with esophageal carcinoma after induction chemoradiotherapy. Cancer 1999;85(5):1026–1032

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Beseth BD, Bedford R, Isacoff WH, Holmes EC, Cameron RB. Endoscopic ultrasound does not accurately assess pathologic stage of esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Am Surg 2000;66(9):827–831

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Laterza E, de Manzoni G, Guglielmi A, Rodella L, Tedesco P, Cordiano C. Endoscopic ultrasonography in the staging of esophageal carcinoma after preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Ann Thorac Surg 1999;67(5):1466–1469

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Zuccaro G Jr, Rice TW, Goldblum J, Medendorp SV, Becker M, Pimentel R, et al Endoscopic ultrasound cannot determine suitability for esophagectomy after aggressive chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94(4):906–912

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wieder HA, Brucher BL, Zimmermann F, Becker K, Lordick F, Beer A, et al Time course of tumor metabolic activity during chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and response to treatment. J Clin Oncol 2004;22(5):900–908

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Weber WA, Ott K, Becker K, Dittler HJ, Helmberger H, Avril NE, et al Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction by metabolic imaging. J Clin Oncol 2001;19(12):3058–3065

    Google Scholar 

  15. Couper GW, McAteer D, Wallis F, Norton M, Welch A, Nicolson M, et al Detection of response to chemotherapy using positron emission tomography in patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer. Br J Surg 1998;85(10):1403–1406

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Brucher BL, Weber W, Bauer M, Fink U, Avril N, Stein HJ, et al Neoadjuvant therapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Ann Surg 2001;233(3):300–309

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. DeYoung CM, Suntharalingam M, Line BR, Doyle LA, Krasna MJ. The ability of whole body FDG18 PET imaging to predict pathologic response to induction chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced esophageal cancer. A prospective phase II trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;57(2 Suppl):S165–S166

    Google Scholar 

  18. Downey RJ, Akhurst T, Ilson D, Ginsberg R, Bains MS, Gonen M, et al Whole body 18FDG-PET and the response of esophageal cancer to induction therapy: results of a prospective trial. J Clin Oncol 2003;21(3):428–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Flamen P, Van Cutsem E, Lerut A, Cambier JP, Haustermans K, Bormans G, et al Positron emission tomography for assessment of the response to induction radiochemotherapy in locally advanced oesophageal cancer. Ann Oncol 2002;13(3):361–368

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kato H, Kuwano H, Nakajima M, Miyazaki T, Yoshikawa M, Masuda N, et al Usefulness of positron emission tomography for assessing the response of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer. Am J Surg 2002;184(3):279–283

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Swisher SG, Erasmus J, Maish M, Correa AM, Macapinlac H, Ajani JA, et al 2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography imaging is predictive of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer 2004;101(8):1776–1785

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Swisher SG, Maish M, Erasmus JJ, Correa AM, Ajani JA, Bresalier R, et al Utility of PET, CT, and EUS to identify pathologic responders in esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78(4):1152–1160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Duong C, Demitriou H, Weih L, Thompson A, Williams D, Thomas RJS, et al Significant clinical impact and prognostic stratification provided by FDG-PET in the staging of oesophageal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. DOI 10.1007/s00259-005-0028-8

  24. Mac Manus MP, Hicks RJ, Matthews JP, McKenzie A, Rischin D, Salminen EK, et al Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography scanning for response-assessment after radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;21(7):1285–1292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hicks RJ, Mac Manus MP, Matthews JP, Hogg A, Binns D, Rischin D, et al Early FDG-PET imaging after radical radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer: inflammatory changes in normal tissues correlate with tumor response and do not confound therapeutic response evaluation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;60(2):412–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wirth A, Seymour JF, Hicks RJ, Ware R, Fisher R, Prince M, et al Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, gallium-67 scintigraphy, and conventional staging for Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Am J Med 2002;112(4):262–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Blum RH, Seymour JF, Wirth A, MacManus M, Hicks RJ. Frequent impact of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on the staging and management of patients with indolent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Clin Lymphoma 2003;4(1):43–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hicks RJ, Kalff V, MacManus MP, Ware RE, Hogg A, McKenzie AF, et al 18F-FDG PET provides high-impact and powerful prognostic stratification in staging newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2001;42(11):1596–1604

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Blum R, MacManus MP, Rischin D, Michael M, Ball D, Hicks RJ. Impact of positron emission tomography on the management of patients with small-cell lung cancer: preliminary experience. Am J Clin Oncol 2004;27(2):164–171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kalff V, Hicks RJ, Ware RE, Hogg A, Binns D, McKenzie AF. The clinical impact of 18F-FDG PET in patients with suspected or confirmed recurrence of colorectal cancer: a prospective study. J Nucl Med 2002;43(4):492–499

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Duong CP, Demitriou H, Williams D, Weih L, Thompson A, Phillips WA, et al Clinical impact of FDG-PET on management of esophageal cancer [abstract]. Ann Surg Oncol 2004;11:S53

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hutton BF, Braun M, Thurfjell L, Lau DY. Image registration: an essential tool for nuclear medicine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29(4):559–577

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Shreve PD. Adding structure to function. J Nucl Med 2000;41(8):1380–1382

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, Gaitini D, Frenkel A, Kuten A, et al Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 2003;44(8):1200–1209

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J, Wahl RL. Direct comparison of 18F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2003;44(11):1797–1803

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Block MI, Patterson GA, Sundaresan RS, Bailey MS, Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F, et al Improvement in staging of esophageal cancer with the addition of positron emission tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 1997;64(3):770–6; discussion 776–777

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, Trask DD, Sundaresan SR, Patterson GA, et al Staging of esophageal cancer with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168(2):417–424

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. McAteer D, Wallis F, Couper G, Norton M, Welch A, Bruce D, et al Evaluation of 18F-FDG positron emission tomography in gastric and oesophageal carcinoma. Br J Radiol 1999;72(858):525–529

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Rankin SC, Taylor H, Cook GJ, Mason R. Computed tomography and positron emission tomography in the pre-operative staging of oesophageal carcinoma. Clin Radiol 1998;53(9):659–665

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Cuong Duong’s research is supported by scholarships from the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons and the National Health and Medical Research Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rodney J. Hicks.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Duong, C.P., Hicks, R.J., Weih, L. et al. FDG-PET status following chemoradiotherapy provides high management impact and powerful prognostic stratification in oesophageal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33, 770–778 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-0040-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-005-0040-z

Keywords

Navigation