Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 102–110 | Cite as

Usefulness of F-18 FDG PET/CT in the Evaluation of Early Treatment Response After Interventional Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

  • Sung Hoon Kim
  • Kyoung Sook Won
  • Byung Wook Choi
  • Il Jo
  • Seok Kil Zeon
  • Woo Jin Chung
  • Jung Hyeok Kwon
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

This retrospective study investigated the usefulness of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) after interventional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

Between March 2007 and November 2010, 31 patients (24 men, 7 women; mean age, 61.8 ± 11.0 years) with 45 lesions underwent PET/CT within 1 month after interventional therapy for HCC. Twenty-six patients with 40 lesions underwent transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE), two patients with 2 lesions underwent radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and three patients with 3 lesions underwent percutaneous ethanol injection therapy (PEIT). Patients with a history of previous interventional therapy were excluded. Visual analysis was graded as positive when FDG was observed as an eccentric, nodular, or infiltrative pattern, and negative in case of isometabolic, hypometabolic, or rim-shaped uptake. For quantitative analysis, the standardized uptake value (SUV) was measured by region of interest technique. Maximum SUV (SUVmax) was assessed, and the ratio of SUVmax of tumor to mean SUV of normal liver (TNR) was calculated. The patients were divided into two groups, with and without residual tumor, based on 6-month clinical follow-up with serum alpha-fetoprotein and contrast-enhanced abdominal CT.

Results

Of the 45 lesions, 24 were classified in the residual tumor group and the other 21 lesions in the no residual tumor group. No residual tumor was detected after RFA or PEIT. By visual analysis, the respective values for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 87.5, 71.4, 77.8, 83.3, and 80.0 %. However, there were no significant differences in the SUVmax and TNR between the two groups.

Conclusions

It is suggested that FDG PET/CT may play a role in the evaluation of early treatment response after interventional therapy for HCC. The results indicate that FDG PET/CT visual analysis may be more useful than quantitative analysis. Further prospective studies with a large number of patients and established protocol are needed to substantiate our results.

Keywords

F-18 FDG PET/CT Hepatocellular carcinoma Interventional therapy Locoregional therapy Response 

References

  1. 1.
    Röcken C, Carl-McGrath S. Pathology and pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Dig Dis. 2001;19:269–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Higashi T, Hatano E, Ikai I, Nishii R, Nakamoto Y, Ishizu K, et al. FDG PET as a prognostic predictor in the early post-therapeutic evaluation for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:468–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Poon RT, Fan ST, Tsang FH, Wong J. Locoregional therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: a critical review from the surgeon's perspective. Ann Surg. 2002;235:466–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thabet A, Kalva S, Gervais DA. Percutaneous image-guided therapy of intra-abdominal malignancy: imaging evaluation of treatment response. Abdom Imaging. 2009;34:593–609.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rampone B, Schiavone B, Martino A, Viviano C, Confuorto G. Current management strategy of hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:3210–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kwon JH. Is percutaneous ethanol injection therapy still effective for hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of radiofrequency ablation? Gut Liver. 2010;4:S105–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Livraghi T. Radiofrequency ablation, PEIT, and TACE for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2003;10:67–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lim HK, Han JK. Hepatocellular carcinoma: evaluation of therapeutic response to interventional procedures. Abdom Imaging. 2002;27:168–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim KW, Lee JM, Choi BI. Assessment of the treatment response of HCC. Abdom Imaging. 2011;36:300–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis. 2010;30:52–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim HO, Kim JS, Shin YM, Ryu JS, Lee YS, Lee SG. Evaluation of metabolic characteristics and viability of lipiodolized hepatocellular carcinomas using 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1849–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paudyal B, Oriuchi N, Paudyal P, Tsushima Y, Iida Y, Higuchi T, et al. Early diagnosis of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma with 18F-FDG PET after radiofrequency ablation therapy. Oncol Rep. 2007;18:1469–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim YK, Lee KW, Cho SY, Han SS, Kim SH, Kim SK, et al. Usefulness 18F-FDG positron tomography/computed tomography for detecting recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma in posttransplant patients. Liver Transpl. 2010;16:767–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Trojan J, Schroeder O, Raedle J, Baum RP, Herrmann G, Jacobi V, et al. Fluorine-18 FDG positron emission tomography for imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:3314–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khan MA, Combs CS, Brunt EM, Lowe VJ, Wolverson MK, Solomon H, et al. Positron emission tomography scanning in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2000;32:792–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sun L, Wu H, Guan YS. Positron emission tomography/computer tomography: challenge to conventional imaging modalities in evaluating primary and metastatic liver malignancies. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:2775–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sun L, Guan YS, Pan WM, Luo ZM, Wei JH, Zhao L, et al. Metabolic restaging of hepatocellular carcinoma using whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT. World J Hepatol. 2009;31:90–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Torizuka T, Tamaki N, Inokuma T, Magata Y, Yonekura Y, Tanaka A, et al. Value of fluorine-18-FDG-PET to monitor hepatocellular carcinoma after interventional therapy. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:1965–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim JW. Diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Kor Liver Cancer Study Group. 2010;10:1–5.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lammertsma AA, Hoekstra CJ, Giaccone G, Hoekstra OS. How should we analyse FDG PET studies for monitoring tumour response? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:S16–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Seo S, Hatano E, Higashi T, Hara T, Tada M, Tamaki N, et al. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts tumor differentiation, P-glycoprotein expression, and outcome after resection in hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:427–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Imperiale A, Federici L, Lefebvre N, Braun JJ, Pfumio F, Kessler R, et al. F-18 FDG PET/CT as a valuable imaging tool for assessing treatment efficacy in inflammatory and infectious diseases. Clin Nucl Med. 2010;35:86–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Veit P, Antoch G, Stergar H, Bockisch A, Forsting M, Kuehl H. Detection of residual tumor after radiofrequency ablation of liver metastasis with dual-modality PET/CT: initial results. Eur Radiol. 2006;16:80–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Purandare NC, Rangarajan V, Shah SA, Sharma AR, Kulkarni SS, Kulkarni AV, et al. Therapeutic response to radiofrequency ablation of neoplastic lesions: FDG PET/CT findings. Radiographics. 2011;31:201–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Becker CD, Grossholz M, Mentha G, Roth A, Giostra E, Schneider PA, et al. Ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma by percutaneous ethanol injection: imaging findings. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1997;20:204–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jiang B, Lou Q, Ding XF, Sa XY, Chen LR, Yu SY, et al. Histopathological changes in rat transplanted hepatoma after lipiodol transarterial embolization. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2004;26:205–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhao M, Wu PH, Zeng YX, Zhang FJ, Huang JH, Fan WJ, et al. Evaluating efficacy of transcatheter arterial chemo-embolization combined with radiofrequency ablation on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma by 18FDG-PET/CT. Ai Zheng. 2005;24:1118–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lokken RP, Gervais DA, Arellano RS, Tuncali K, Morrison PR, Tatli S, et al. Inflammatory nodules mimic applicator track seeding after percutaneous ablation of renal tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:845–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Khandani AH, Calvo BF, O'Neil BH, Jorgenson J, Mauro MA. A pilot study of early 18F-FDG PET to evaluate the effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation of liver metastases. AMJ Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:1199–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Heusner TA, Fronz U, Jentzen W, Verhagen R, Forsting M, Bockisch A, et al. The effect of different chemoembolization materials on CT-based attenuation correction in PET/CT. Rofo. 2007;179:1159–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shreve PD, Anzai Y, Wahl RL. Pitfalls in oncologic diagnosis with FDG PET imaging: physiologic and benign variants. Radiographics. 1999;19:61–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sturgeon CM, Duffy MJ, Hofmann BR, Lamerz R, Fritsche HA, Gaarenstroom K, et al. National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry Laboratory Medicine Practice Guidelines for use of tumor markers in liver, bladder, cervical, and gastric cancers. Clin Chem. 2010;56:e1–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, Beaugrand M, Lencioni R, Burroughs AK, et al. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL Conference. J Hepatol. 2001;35:421–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Benson 3rd AB, Abrams TA, Ben-Josef E, Bloomston PM, Botha JF, Clary BM, et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: hepatobiliary cancers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2009;7:350–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Giovannini M, Elias D, Monges G, Raoul JL, Rougier P. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Br J Cancer. 2001;84:74–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Leung TWT, Patt YZ, Lau WY, Ho SKW, Yu SCH, Chan ATC, et al. Complete pathological remission is possible with systemic combination chemotherapy for inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 1999;5:1676–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lee JK, Chung YH, Song BC, Shin JW, Choi WB, Yang SH, et al. Recurrences of hepatocellular carcinoma following initial remission by transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2002;17:52–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sung Hoon Kim
    • 1
  • Kyoung Sook Won
    • 1
  • Byung Wook Choi
    • 1
  • Il Jo
    • 1
  • Seok Kil Zeon
    • 1
  • Woo Jin Chung
    • 2
  • Jung Hyeok Kwon
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Nuclear MedicineKeimyung University, School of MedicineJung-guRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Internal MedicineKeimyung University, School of MedicineDaeguKorea
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyKeimyung University, School of MedicineDaeguKorea

Personalised recommendations