Advertisement

Prognostic impact of combining whole-body PET/CT and brain PET/MR in patients with lung adenocarcinoma and brain metastases

  • Kung-Chu Ho
  • Cheng-Hong Toh
  • Shih-Hong Li
  • Chien-Ying Liu
  • Cheng-Ta Yang
  • Yu-Jen Lu
  • Tzu-Pei Su
  • Chih-Wei Wang
  • Tzu-Chen Yen
Original Article
  • 42 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The role of brain FDG-PET in patients with lung cancer and brain metastases remains unclear. Here, we sought to determine the prognostic significance of whole-body PET/CT plus brain PET/MR in predicting the time to neurological progression (nTTP) and overall survival (OS) in this patient group.

Methods

Of 802 patients with non-small cell lung cancer who underwent primary staging by a single-day protocol of whole-body PET/CT plus brain PET/MR, 72 cases with adenocarcinoma and brain metastases were enrolled for a prognostic analysis of OS. On the basis of the available follow-up brain status, only 52 patients were eligible for prognostic analysis of nTTP. Metastatic brain tumors were identified on post-contrast MR imaging, and the tumor-to-brain ratio (TBR) was measured on PET images.

Results

Multivariate analysis revealed that FDG-PET findings and eligibility for initial treatment with targeted therapy were significant independent predictors of nTTP and OS. A new index, termed the molecular imaging prognostic (MIP) score, was proposed to define three disease classes. MIP scores were significant predictors of both nTTP and OS (P < 0.001). Pre-existing prognostic indices such as Lung-molGPA scores were significant predictors of OS but did not predict nTTP.

Conclusions

When staging is performed with whole-body PET/CT plus brain PET/MR, our new prognostic index may be helpful to stratify the outcomes of patients with lung adenocarcinoma and brain metastases. The superior prognostic power of this index for nTTP might be used to select appropriate patients for intracranial control and thereby achieve better quality of life.

Keywords

Lung adenocarcinoma Brain metastasis PET/CT PET/MR 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by a grant from the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (CMRPG3B0343), Taiwan. The authors acknowledge the statistical assistance provided by the Clinical Trial Center (MOHW107-TDU-B-212-123005), Linkou, Taiwan.

Funding

This study was financially supported by a grant from the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (CMRPG3B0343), Taiwan.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and the 1964 Helsinki Declaration (and its later amendments).

Informed consent

Waiver of consent for this retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Review Board.

References

  1. 1.
    Schouten LJ, Rutten J, Huveneers HA, Twijnstra A. Incidence of brain metastases in a cohort of patients with carcinoma of the breast, colon, kidney, and lung and melanoma. Cancer. 2002;94:2698–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Villano JL, Durbin EB, Normandeau C, Thakkar JP, Moirangthem V, Davis FG. Incidence of brain metastasis at initial presentation of lung cancer. Neuro-Oncology. 2015;17:122–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barnholtz-Sloan JS, Sloan AE, Davis FG, Vigneau FD, Lai P, Sawaya RE. Incidence proportions of brain metastases in patients diagnosed (1973 to 2001) in the metropolitan Detroit Cancer surveillance system. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2865–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mujoomdar A, Austin JH, Malhotra R, Powell CA, Pearson GD, Shiau MC, et al. Clinical predictors of metastatic disease to the brain from non-small cell lung carcinoma: primary tumor size, cell type, and lymph node metastases. Radiology. 2007;242:882–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goncalves PH, Peterson SL, Vigneau FD, Shore RD, Quarshie WO, Islam K, et al. Risk of brain metastases in patients with nonmetastatic lung cancer: analysis of the Metropolitan Detroit Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data. Cancer. 2016;122:1921–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Guidelines for Treatment of Cancer by Site: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. 2018 https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/nscl.pdf.
  7. 7.
    Zakaria R, Das K, Bhojak M, Radon M, Walker C, Jenkinson MD. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of brain metastases: diagnosis to prognosis. Cancer Imaging. 2014;14:8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yokoi K, Kamiya N, Matsuguma H, Machida S, Hirose T, Mori K, et al. Detection of brain metastasis in potentially operable non-small cell lung cancer: a comparison of CT and MRI. Chest. 1999;115:714–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wessman BV, Moriarity AK, Ametlli V, Kastan DJ. Reducing barriers to timely MR imaging scheduling. Radiographics. 2014;34:2064–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee SM, Goo JM, Park CM, Yoon SH, Paeng JC, Cheon GJ, et al. Preoperative staging of non-small cell lung cancer: prospective comparison of PET/MR and PET/CT. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:3850–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heusch P, Buchbender C, Köhler J, Nensa F, Gauler T, Gomez B, et al. Thoracic staging in lung cancer: prospective comparison of 18F-FDG PET/MR imaging and 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:373–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schwenzer NF, Schraml C, Müller M, Brendle C, Sauter A, Spengler W, et al. Pulmonary lesion assessment: comparison of whole-body hybrid MR/PET and PET/CT imaging—pilot study. Radiology. 2012;264:551–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fraioli F, Screaton NJ, Janes SM, Win T, Menezes L, Kayani I, et al. Non-small-cell lung cancer resectability: diagnostic value of PET/MR. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stelzer KJ. Epidemiology and prognosis of brain metastases. Surg Neurol Int. 2013;4:S192–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lin X, DeAngelis LM. Treatment of brain metastases. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:3475–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sperduto PW, Kased N, Roberge D, Xu Z, Shanley R, Luo X, et al. Summary report on the graded prognostic assessment: an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:419–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sperduto PW, Yang TJ, Beal K, Pan H, Brown PD, Bangdiwala A, et al. Estimating survival in patients with lung cancer and brain metastases: an update of the graded prognostic assessment for lung cancer using molecular markers (Lung-molGPA). JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:827–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hjorthaug K, Hojbjerg JA, Knap MM, Tietze A, Haraldsen A, Zacho HD, et al. Accuracy of 18F-FDG PET-CT in triaging lung cancer patients with suspected brain metastases for MRI. Nucl Med Commun. 2015;36:1084–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hendriks LE, Derks JL, Postmus PE, Damhuis RA, Houben RM, Troost EG, et al. Single organ metastatic disease and local disease status, prognostic factors for overall survival in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer: results from a population-based study. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:2534–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paesmans M, Berghmans T, Dusart M, Garcia C, Hossein-Foucher C, Lafitte JJ, et al. Primary tumor standardized uptake value measured on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography is of prognostic value for survival in non-small cell lung cancer: update of a systematic review and meta-analysis by the European Lung Cancer working Party for the International Association for the study of lung cancer staging project. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5:612–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Na F, Wang J, Li C, Deng L, Xue J, Lu Y. Primary tumor standardized uptake value measured on F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography is of prediction value for survival and local control in non-small-cell lung cancer receiving radiotherapy: meta-analysis. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9:834–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Varrone A, Asenbaum S, Vander Borght T, Booij J, Nobili F, Nagren K, et al. EANM procedure guidelines for PET brain imaging using [18F]FDG, version 2. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:2103–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Aasheim LB, Karlberg A, Goa PE, Haberg A, Sorhaug S, Fagerli UM, et al. PET/MR brain imaging: evaluation of clinical UTE-based attenuation correction. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1439–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Unterrainer M, Galldiks N, Suchorska B, Kowalew LC, Wenter V, Schmid-Tannwald C, et al. (18)F-FET PET uptake characteristics in patients with newly diagnosed and untreated brain metastasis. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:584–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gempt J, Bette S, Buchmann N, Ryang YM, Forschler A, Pyka T, et al. Volumetric analysis of F-18-FET-PET imaging for brain metastases. World Neurosurg. 2015;84:1790–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2010.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diaz ME, Debowski M, Hukins C, Fielding D, Fong KM, Bettington CS. Non-small cell lung cancer brain metastasis screening in the era of positron emission tomography-CT staging: current practice and outcomes. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2018;62:383–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kruger S, Mottaghy FM, Buck AK, Maschke S, Kley H, Frechen D, et al. Brain metastasis in lung cancer. Comparison of cerebral MRI and 18F-FDG-PET/CT for diagnosis in the initial staging. Nuklearmedizin. 2011;50:101–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lee HY, Chung JK, Jeong JM, Lee DS, Kim DG, Jung HW, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET findings of brain metastasis from non-small-cell lung cancer and small-cell lung cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2008;22:281–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yan J, Lim JC, Townsend DW. MRI-guided brain PET image filtering and partial volume correction. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60:961–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Villemagne VL, Pike KE, Chetelat G, Ellis KA, Mulligan RS, Bourgeat P, et al. Longitudinal assessment of Abeta and cognition in aging and Alzheimer disease. Ann Neurol. 2011;69:181–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Greve DN, Salat DH, Bowen SL, Izquierdo-Garcia D, Schultz AP, Catana C, et al. Different partial volume correction methods lead to different conclusions: an (18)F-FDG-PET study of aging. NeuroImage. 2016;132:334–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Naidoo J, Sima CS, Rodriguez K, Busby N, Nafa K, Ladanyi M, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor exon 20 insertions in advanced lung adenocarcinomas: clinical outcomes and response to erlotinib. Cancer. 2015;121:3212–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hoffknecht P, Tufman A, Wehler T, Pelzer T, Wiewrodt R, Schutz M, et al. Efficacy of the irreversible ErbB family blocker afatinib in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-pretreated non-small-cell lung cancer patients with brain metastases or leptomeningeal disease. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10:156–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mulvenna P, Nankivell M, Barton R, Faivre-Finn C, Wilson P, McColl E, et al. Dexamethasone and supportive care with or without whole brain radiotherapy in treating patients with non-small cell lung cancer with brain metastases unsuitable for resection or stereotactic radiotherapy (QUARTZ): results from a phase 3, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2004–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Li SH, Liu CY, Hsu PC, Fang YF, Wang CC, Kao KC, et al. Response to afatinib in treatment-naive patients with advanced mutant epidermal growth factor receptor lung adenocarcinoma with brain metastases. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2018;18:81–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sung S, Lee SW, Kwak YK, Kang JH, Hong SH, Kim YS. Intracranial control and survival outcome of tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) alone versus TKI plus radiotherapy for brain metastasis of epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant non-small cell lung cancer. J Neuro-Oncol. 2018;139:205–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu Y, Deng L, Zhou X, Gong Y, Xu Y, Zhou L, et al. Concurrent brain radiotherapy and EGFR-TKI may improve intracranial metastases control in non-small cell lung cancer and have survival benefit in patients with low DS-GPA score. Oncotarget. 2017;8:111309–17.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gadgeel SM, Gandhi L, Riely GJ, Chiappori AA, West HL, Azada MC, et al. Safety and activity of alectinib against systemic disease and brain metastases in patients with crizotinib-resistant ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer (AF-002JG): results from the dose-finding portion of a phase 1/2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1119–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kung-Chu Ho
    • 1
  • Cheng-Hong Toh
    • 2
  • Shih-Hong Li
    • 3
  • Chien-Ying Liu
    • 3
  • Cheng-Ta Yang
    • 3
  • Yu-Jen Lu
    • 4
  • Tzu-Pei Su
    • 1
  • Chih-Wei Wang
    • 5
  • Tzu-Chen Yen
    • 6
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear MedicineChang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung UniversityKeelungTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Medical Imaging and InterventionChang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  3. 3.Department of Thoracic MedicineChang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of NeurosurgeryChang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  5. 5.Department of Anatomic PathologyChang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  6. 6.Department of Nuclear Medicine and Center for Advanced Molecular Imaging and TranslationChang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  7. 7.Department of Nuclear MedicineXiamen Chang Gung HospitalXiamenChina

Personalised recommendations