Advertisement

The Correlation Between [68Ga]DOTATATE PET/CT and Cell Proliferation in Patients With GEP-NENs

  • Jiangyuan Yu
  • Nan Li
  • Jie Li
  • Ming Lu
  • Jeffrey P. Leal
  • Huangying Tan
  • Hua Su
  • Yang Fan
  • Yan Zhang
  • Wei Zhao
  • Hua Zhu
  • Martin G. Pomper
  • Yun ZhouEmail author
  • Zhi YangEmail author
Research Article
  • 142 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Objectives of the study are to analyze the correlation between [68Ga]DOTATATE positron emission tomography (PET)/X-ray computed tomography (CT) measurements and various biological characteristics of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs), and to determine optimal cutoff value of SUVmax (standard uptake value) to differentiate neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and neuroendocrine cancers (NECs).

Procedures

Of the GEP-NEN cases (73 males, 53 females; age 18–77 years) with pathologically proven primary and/or metastatic lesions, 126 were studied. All of the short axes of lesions were larger than 0.5 cm in order to avoid the partial volume effect. Patients fasted for 6 h before the PET/CT scans. The dose of [68Ga]DOTATATE was 100–200 MBq and the acquisition began at 1 h after injection. The lesion with the highest SUVmax in each patient was analyzed.

Results

In the total sample, the sensitivity of [68Ga]DOTATATE was 69.05 %. The sensitivities were significantly different among G1, G2, and G3 groups (72.22 %, 91.53 %, and 40.82 %, respectively; p < 0.01). The SUVmax of the G3 group was lowest. We also found that the sensitivity and SUVmax were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in patients with pancreatic NENs (Pan-NENs) than in patients with gastrointestinal NENs (Gi-NENs) and unknown primary NENs (Up-NENs). A significant negative correlation between SUVmax and Ki-67 was found (r = − 0.429, p < 0.01). Using SUVmax to differentiate neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and neuroendocrine cancers (NECs), the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.771 and the cutoff value of SUVmax was 11.25 (sensitivity 79.2 %, specificity 65.3 %). However, Pan-NENs did not show any statistical significance results in correlation and ROC analysis.

Conclusion

[68Ga]DOTATATE PET/CT results showed a negative correlation with GEP-NEN cell proliferation and were complementary to Ki-67. Pan-NENs were different from Gi-NENs and Up-NENs when compared to somatostatin receptor expression.

Key words

Neuroendocrine tumor Somatostatin receptor PET/CT [68Ga]DOTATATE Cell proliferation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the staff of the departments involved in the study, the referring clinicians for their input into management data, and the patients who participated in the study. We particularly thank Judy Buchanan, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, USA, for her suggestions of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by Science Foundation of Peking University Cancer Hospital.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Garcia-Carbonero R, Capdevila J, Crespo-Herrero G, Diaz-Perez JA, Martinez del Prado MP, Alonso Orduna V, Sevilla-Garcia I, Villabona-Artero C, Beguiristain-Gomez A, Llanos-Munoz M, Marazuela M, Alvarez-Escola C, Castellano D, Vilar E, Jimenez-Fonseca P, Teule A, Sastre-Valera J, Benavent-Vinuelas M, Monleon A, Salazar R (2010) Incidence, patterns of care and prognostic factors for outcome of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs): results from the National Cancer Registry of Spain (RGETNE). Ann Oncol 21:1794–1803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rindi G, Petrone G, Inzani F (2014) The 2010 WHO classification of digestive neuroendocrine neoplasms: a critical appraisal four years after its introduction. Endocr Pathol 25:186–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rindi G, Klöppel G, Couvelard A, Komminoth P, Körner M, Lopes JM, McNicol AM, Nilsson O, Perren A, Scarpa A, Scoazec JY, Wiedenmann B (2007) TNM staging of midgut and hindgut (neuro) endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch 451:757–762CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yang Z, Tang LH, Klimstra DS (2011) Effect of tumor heterogeneity on the assessment of Ki67 labeling index in well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors metastatic to the liver: implications for prognostic stratification. Am J Surg Pathol 35:853–860CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Adesoye T, Daleo MA, Loeffler AG et al (2015) Discordance of histologic grade between primary and metastatic neuroendocrine carcinomas. Ann Surg Oncol Suppl 3:S817–S821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yao JC, Phan AT, Chang DZ, Wolff RA, Hess K, Gupta S, Jacobs C, Mares JE, Landgraf AN, Rashid A, Meric-Bernstam F (2008) Efficacy of RAD001 (everolimus) and octreotide LAR in advanced low- to intermediate-grade neuroendocrine tumors: results of a phase II study. J Clin Oncol 26:4311–4318CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Singh S, Hallet J, Rowsell C, Law CH (2014) Variability of Ki67 labeling index in multiple neuroendocrine tumors specimens over the course of the disease. Eur J Surg Oncol 40:1517–1522CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Campana D, Ambrosini V, Pezzilli R, Fanti S, Labate AMM, Santini D, Ceccarelli C, Nori F, Franchi R, Corinaldesi R, Tomassetti P (2010) Standardized uptake values of (68)Ga-DOTANOC PET: a promising prognostic tool in neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med 51:353–359CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tirosh A, Papadakis GZ, Millo C et al (2018) Prognostic utility of Total 68Ga-DOTATATE-avid tumor volume in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. Gastroenterology 154:998–1008CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reubi JC, Kvols L, Krenning E, Lamberts SW (1991) In vitro and in vivo detection of somatostatin receptors in human malignant tissues. Acta Oncol 30:463–468CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kvols LK, Reubi JC, Horisberger U et al (1992) The presence of somatostatin receptors in malignant neuroendocrine tumor tissue predicts responsiveness to octreotide. Yale J Biol Med 65:505–518PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerdes J, Schwab U, Lemke H, Stein H (1983) Production of a mouse monoclonal antibody reactive with a human nuclear antigen associated with cell proliferation. Int J Cancer 31:13–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gerdes J, Lemke H, Baisch H et al (1984) Cell cycle analysis of a cell proliferation-associated human nuclear antigen defined by the monoclonal antibody Ki-67. J Immunol 133:1710–1715PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scholzen T, Gerdes J (2000) The Ki-67 protein: from the known and the unknown. J Cell Physiol 182:311–322CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Martin B, Paesmans M, Mascaux C, Berghmans T, Lothaire P, Meert AP, Lafitte JJ, Sculier JP (2004) Ki-67 expression and patients survival in lung cancer: systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 91:2018–2025CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Inwald EC, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Hofstädter F, Zeman F, Koller M, Gerstenhauer M, Ortmann O (2013) Ki-67 is a prognostic parameter in breast cancer patients: results of a large population-based cohort of a cancer registry. Breast Cancer Res Treat 139:539–552CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klimstra DS (2013) Pathology reporting of neuroendocrine tumors: essential elements for accurate diagnosis, classification, and staging. Semin Oncol 40:23–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dhall D, Mertens R, Bresee C, Parakh R, Wang HL, Li M, Dhall G, Colquhoun SD, Ines D, Chung F, Yu R, Nissen NN, Wolin E (2012) Ki-67 proliferative index predicts progression-free survival of patients with well-differentiated ileal neuroendocrine tumors. Hum Pathol 43:489–495CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miller HC, Drymousis P, Flora R, Goldin R, Spalding D, Frilling A (2014) Role of Ki-67 proliferation index in the assessment of patients with neuroendocrine neoplasias regarding the stage of disease. World J Surg 38:1353–1361CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    O’Toole D, Saveanu A, Couvelard A, Gunz G, Enjalbert A, Jaquet P, Ruszniewski P, Barlier A (2006) The analysis of quantitative expression of somatostatin and dopamine receptors in gastro-entero-pancreatic tumours opens new therapeutic strategies. Eur J Endocrinol 155:849–857CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© World Molecular Imaging Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiangyuan Yu
    • 1
  • Nan Li
    • 1
  • Jie Li
    • 2
  • Ming Lu
    • 2
  • Jeffrey P. Leal
    • 3
  • Huangying Tan
    • 4
  • Hua Su
    • 1
  • Yang Fan
    • 1
  • Yan Zhang
    • 1
  • Wei Zhao
    • 1
  • Hua Zhu
    • 1
  • Martin G. Pomper
    • 3
  • Yun Zhou
    • 5
    Email author
  • Zhi Yang
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear Medicine, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing)Peking University Cancer Hospital & InstituteBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education/Beijing)Peking University Cancer Hospital & InstituteBeijingChina
  3. 3.Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological ScienceJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Department of Integrative OncologyChina-Japan Friendship HospitalBeijingChina
  5. 5.Department of RadiologyWashington University School of MedicineSt LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations