Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

High maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) on PET scan is associated with shorter survival in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Hematology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

FDG-PET scan plays an important role in response assessment in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). In this study, we evaluated the prognostic value of maximum standard uptake (SUVmax) on pretreatment PET scan in DLBCL. Among 169 patients with DLBCL newly diagnosed and treated with R-CHOP between 2003 and 2008, 110 patients who had undergone pretreatment PET scan in single institute using an identical protocol were reviewed and analyzed. SUVmax at the predominant lesion on PET scan and other patient characteristics were evaluated for their association with complete response (CR) rate, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The median SUVmax was 18.1 (2.0–36.4). There was no significant association between high SUV and other characteristics with the exception of PS ≥ 2 and Ki-67. Multivariate analysis revealed the independent association between high SUVmax and lower CR rate. The 3-year PFS rates in patients with SUV < 30 and those with SUV ≥ 30 were 78 and 51%, respectively (p = 0.06). The 3-year OS rates were 86 and 71%, respectively (p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis revealed that high SUVmax is a significant poor prognostic factor for both PFS and OS, independent of IPI. We showed the important prognostic value of pretreatment SUVmax of PET scan in DLBCL.

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. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, Gascoyne RD, Specht L, Horning SJ, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:579–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, Ritchie JM, Menda Y, Wooldridge JE, et al. Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4652–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Vandenberghe P, Thomas J, de Groot T, et al. Early restaging positron emission tomography with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2002;13:1356–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cheson BD. New staging and response criteria for non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma. Radiol Clin North Am. 2008;46:213–23 (vii).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Buchmann I, Reinhardt M, Elsner K, Bunjes D, Altehoefer C, Finke J, et al. 2-(fluorine-18)Fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma: a bicenter trial. Cancer. 2001;91:889–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, Ralfkiaer E, Specht L. Different histopathological subtypes of Hodgkin lymphoma show significantly different levels of FDG uptake. Hematol Oncol. 2006;24:146–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schoder H, Noy A, Gonen M, Weng L, Green D, Erdi YE, et al. Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4643–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pan L, Gu P, Huang G, Xue H, Wu S. Prognostic significance of SUV on PET/CT in patients with esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;21:1008–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang B, Li X, Lu X. Standardized uptake value is of prognostic value for outcome in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Acta Otolaryngol. 2010 (Epub ahead of print).

  10. Kim YS, Lee MK, Kim SJ, Kim IJ, Kim YK, Jo WS, et al. Prognostic stratification using F-18 FDG PET/CT in patients with advanced stage (stage III and IV) non-small cell lung cancer. Neoplasma. 2010;57:241–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van Baardwijk A, Dooms C, van Suylen RJ, Verbeken E, Hochstenbag M, Dehing-Oberije C, et al. The maximum uptake of (18)F-deoxyglucose on positron emission tomography scan correlates with survival, hypoxia inducible factor-1α and GLUT-1 in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43:1392–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Berghmans T, Dusart M, Paesmans M, Hossein-Foucher C, Buvat I, Castaigne C, et al. Primary tumor standardized uptake value (SUVmax) measured on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is of prognostic value for survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a systematic review and meta-analysis (MA) by the European Lung Cancer Working Party for the IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project. J Thorac Oncol. 2008;3:6–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Yi JH, Kim SJ, Choi JY, Ko YH, Kim BT, Kim WS. (18)F-FDG uptake and its clinical relevance in primary gastric lymphoma. Hematol Oncol. 2009 (Epub ahead of print).

  14. Itti E, Lin C, Dupuis J, Paone G, Capacchione D, Rahmouni A, et al. Prognostic value of interim 18F-FDG PET in patients with diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment at 4 cycles of chemotherapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:527–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lin C, Itti E, Haioun C, Petegnief Y, Luciani A, Dupuis J, et al. Early 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1626–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The International Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Prognostic Factors Project. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:987–94.

  17. Sehn LH, Berry B, Chhanabhai M, Fitzgerald C, Gill K, Hoskins P, et al. The Revised International Prognostic Index (R-IPI) is a better predictor of outcome than the standard IPI for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP. Blood. 2007;109:1857–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hans CP, Weisenburger DD, Greiner TC, Gascoyne RD, Delabie J, Ott G, et al. Confirmation of the molecular classification of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma by immunohistochemistry using a tissue microarray. Blood. 2004;103:275–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Boellaard R, van Lingen A, Lammertsma AA. Experimental and clinical evaluation of iterative reconstruction (OSEM) in dynamic PET: quantitative characteristics and effects on kinetic modeling. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:808–17.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Oki Y, Ogura M, Kato H, Kikuchi A, Taji H, Kagami Y, et al. Phase II study of a salvage regimen using cyclophosphamide, high-dose cytarabine, dexamethasone, etoposide, and rituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Cancer Sci. 2008;99:179–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Velasquez WS, McLaughlin P, Tucker S, Hagemeister FB, Swan F, Rodriguez MA, et al. ESHAP–an effective chemotherapy regimen in refractory and relapsing lymphoma: a 4-year follow-up study. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:1169–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chihara D, Oki Y, Ine S, Kato H, Onoda H, Taji H, et al. Primary gastric diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): analyses of prognostic factors and value of pretreatment FDG-PET scan. Eur J Haematol. 2010 (Epub ahead of print).

  23. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, Mottaghy FM, Dietlein M, Guermazi A, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:571–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Keyes JW Jr. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1836–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nahmias C, Wahl LM. Reproducibility of standardized uptake value measurements determined by 18F-FDG PET in malignant tumors. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1804–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Taichi Kobayashi for his excellent support on collecting data.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Hematology and Cell Therapy, Aichi Cancer Center Hospital, 1-1 Kanokoden, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, 464-8681, Japan

    Dai Chihara, Yasuhiro Oki, Hiroshi Onoda, Hirofumi Taji, Kazuhito Yamamoto & Yasuo Morishima

  2. Department of Radiology, Nagoya PET Imaging Center, Aichi, Japan

    Tsuneo Tamaki

Authors
  1. Dai Chihara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yasuhiro Oki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hiroshi Onoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hirofumi Taji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kazuhito Yamamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tsuneo Tamaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yasuo Morishima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yasuhiro Oki.

About this article

Cite this article

Chihara, D., Oki, Y., Onoda, H. et al. High maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax) on PET scan is associated with shorter survival in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Int J Hematol 93, 502–508 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12185-011-0822-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12185-011-0822-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation