Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Standardized uptake value on positron emission tomography/computed tomography predicts prognosis in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer

  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The aim of the present study was to investigate the use and value of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) on positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) images as a prognostic marker for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

Materials and methods

The medical records of all consecutive patients who underwent PET/CT examination in our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion criteria were histologically or cytologically proven LAPC. Patients with distant metastasis were excluded. For statistical analysis, the SUVmax of primary pancreatic cancer was measured. Survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and multivariable analysis was performed to determine the association of SUVmax with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) using a Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

Between July 2006 and June 2013, 69 patients were enrolled in the present study. OS and PFS were 14.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.1–16.7] and 8.3 months (95% CI 7.1–9.5), respectively. A high SUVmax (>5.5) was observed in 35 patients, who had significantly worse OS and PFS than the remaining patients with a low SUVmax (P = 0.025 and P = 0.003). Univariate analysis showed that SUVmax and tumor size were prognostic factors for OS, with a hazard ratio of 1.90 and 1.81, respectively. A high SUVmax was an independent prognostic factor, with a hazard ratio of 1.89 (95% CI 1.015–3.519, P = 0.045).

Conclusion

The present study suggests that increased SUVmax is a predictor of poor prognosis in patients with LAPC.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hidaglo M (2010) Pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med 362(17):1605–1617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. (2008) Cancer statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin 58:71–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Li D, Xie K, Wolff R, Abbruzzese JL (2004) Pancreatic cancer. Lancet 363:1049–1057

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fung MC, Ishiguro H, Takayama S, et al. (2003) Survival benefit of chemo-therapy treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis. Am Soc Clin Oncol 22:1155

    Google Scholar 

  5. Burris H, Moore M, Anderson J, et al. (1997) Improvements in survival and clinical benefit with gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreas cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 15:6

    Google Scholar 

  6. Spry N, Harvey J, Macleod C, et al. (2008) 3D radiotherapy can be safely combined with sandwich systemic gemcitabine chemotherapy in the management of pancreatic cancer: factors influencing outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 70(5):1438–1446

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Huguet F, Goodman KA, Azria D, et al. (2012) Radiotherapy technical considerations in the management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer: American-French Consensus Recommendations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(5):1355–1364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Loehrer PJS, Feng Y, Cardenes H, et al. (2011) Gemcitabine alone versus gemcitabine plus radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group trial. J Clin Oncol 29(31):4105–4112

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Laurence JM, Tran PD, Morarji K, et al. (2011) A systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and surgical outcomes following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 15(11):2059–2069

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dibble EH, Karantanis D, Mercier G, et al. (2012) PET/CT of cancer patients: Part 1, pancreatic neoplasms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199(5):952–967

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. De Giorgi U, Valero V, Rohren E, et al. (2009) Circulating tumor cells and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for outcome prediction in metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 27(20):3303–3311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Takeuchi S, Khiewvan B, Fox PS, et al. (2014) Impact of initial PET/CT staging in terms of clinical stage, management plan, and prognosis in 592 patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41(5):906–914

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yip VS, Poston GJ, Fenwick SW, et al. (2014) FDG-PET-CT is effective in selecting patients with poor long term survivals for colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol 40(8):995–999

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Bhat K, Wang F, Ma Q, et al. (2012) Advances in biomarker research for pancreatic cancer. Curr Pharm Des 18(17):2439–2451

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ma MZ, Kong X, Weng MZ, et al. (2013) Candidate microRNA biomarkers of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: meta-analysis, experimental validation and clinical significance. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 28(32):71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Boeck S, Wittwer C, Heinemann V, Haas M, et al. (2013) Cytokeratin 19-fragments (CYFRA 21-1) as a novel serum biomarker for response and survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer 108(8):1684–1694

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Liu SL, Chen G, Zhao YP, et al. (2013) Diagnostic accuracy of K-ras mutation for pancreatic carcinoma: a meta-analysis. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 12(5):458–464

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ballehaninna UK, Chamberlain RS (2013) Biomarkers for pancreatic cancer: promising new markers and options beyond CA 19-9. Tumour Biol 34(6):3279–3292

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith RA, Tang J, Tudur-Smith C, et al. (2011) Meta-analysis of immunohistochemical prognostic markers in resected pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer 104(9):1440–1451

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Strauss LG, Conti PS (1991) The applications of PET in clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 32:623–648

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Picchio M, Giovannini E, Passoni P, et al. (2012) Role of PET/CT in the clinical management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Tumori 98(5):643–651

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nguyen VX, Nguyen CC, Nguyen BD (2011) 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging of the pancreas: spectrum of diseases. JOP 12(6):557–566

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nakata B, Nishimura S, Ishikawa T, et al. (2001) Prognostic predictive value of 18Ffluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for patients with pancreatic cancer. Int J Oncol 19:53–58

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sperti C, Pasquali C, Chierichetti F, et al. (2003) 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in predicting survival of patients with pancreatic carcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 7:953–959

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schellenberg D, Quon A, Minn AY, et al. (2010) 18Fluorodeoxyglucose PET is prognostic of we locally advanced pancreas cancer treated with stereotactic radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 77:1420–1425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sun Y, Duan Q, Wang S, et al. (2015) Diagnosis of pancreatic cancer using 18F-FDG PET/CT and CA19-9 with SUVmax association to clinical characteristics. J BUON 20:452–459

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Moon SY, Joo KR, So YR (2013) Predictive value of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) on 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Clin Nucl Med 38(10):778–783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Pedersen SF, Græbe M, Hag AMF, et al. (2013) 18F-FDG imaging of human atherosclerotic carotid plaques reflects gene expression of the key hypoxia marker HIF-1α. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 3(5):384–392

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Couvelard A, O’Toole D, Leek R, Turley H, et al. (2005) Expression of hypoxia-inducible factors is correlated with the presence of a fibrotic focus and angiogenesis in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas. Histopathology 46(6):668–676

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Polat E, Duman U, Duman M, et al. (2014) Diagnostic value of preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 in colorectal cancer. Curr Oncol 21:e1–e7

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Grunnet M, Christensen IJ, Lassen U, et al. (2015) Decline in CA19-9 during chemotherapy predicts survival in four independent cohorts of patients with inoperable bile duct cancer. Eur J Cancer 51:1381–1388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Humphris JL, Chang DK, Johns AL, et al. (2012) The prognostic and predictive value of serum CA19.9 in pancreatic cancer. Ann Oncol 23:1713–1722

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yoo T, Lee WJ, Woo SM, et al. (2011) Pretreatment carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level indicates tumor response, early distant metastasis, overall survival, and therapeutic selection in localized and unresectable pancreatic cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 81:e623–e630

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Oncology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Road, Shenyang, 110004, China

    Si-Liang Wang, Shuo Cao, Yu-Nan Sun, Rong Wu, Feng Chi, Mei-Yue Tang, Xue-Ying Jin & Xiao-Dong Chen

Authors
  1. Si-Liang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shuo Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yu-Nan Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rong Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Feng Chi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mei-Yue Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Xue-Ying Jin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Xiao-Dong Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rong Wu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, SL., Cao, S., Sun, YN. et al. Standardized uptake value on positron emission tomography/computed tomography predicts prognosis in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Abdom Imaging 40, 3117–3121 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0544-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0544-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation