2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer
Abstract This study aimed to compare CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT for response monitoring metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The primary objective was to predict progression-free and disease-specific survival for responders vs. non-responders on CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT. The secondary objective was t...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32727-w |
| _version_ | 1797850137960120320 |
|---|---|
| author | Marianne Vogsen Mohammad Naghavi-Behzad Frederik Graae Harbo Nick Møldrup Jakobsen Oke Gerke Jon Thor Asmussen Henriette Juel Nissen Sara Elisabeth Dahlsgaard-Wallenius Poul-Erik Braad Jeanette Dupont Jensen Marianne Ewertz Malene Grubbe Hildebrandt |
| author_facet | Marianne Vogsen Mohammad Naghavi-Behzad Frederik Graae Harbo Nick Møldrup Jakobsen Oke Gerke Jon Thor Asmussen Henriette Juel Nissen Sara Elisabeth Dahlsgaard-Wallenius Poul-Erik Braad Jeanette Dupont Jensen Marianne Ewertz Malene Grubbe Hildebrandt |
| author_sort | Marianne Vogsen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract This study aimed to compare CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT for response monitoring metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The primary objective was to predict progression-free and disease-specific survival for responders vs. non-responders on CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT. The secondary objective was to assess agreement between response categorization for the two modalities. Treatment response in women with MBC was monitored prospectively by simultaneous CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT, allowing participants to serve as their own controls. The standardized response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1) and PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST) were used for response categorization. For prediction of progression-free and disease-specific survival, treatment response was dichotomized into responders (partial and complete response) and non-responders (stable and progressive disease) at the first follow-up scan. Progression-free survival was defined as the time from baseline until disease progression or death from any cause. Disease-specific survival was defined as the time from baseline until breast cancer-specific death. Agreement between response categorization for both modalities was analyzed for all response categories and responders vs. non-responders. At the first follow-up, tumor response was reported more often by 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT than CE-CT, with only fair agreement on response categorization between the two modalities (weighted Kappa 0.28). Two-year progression-free survival for responders vs. non-responders by CE-CT was 54.2% vs. 46.0%, compared with 59.1% vs. 14.3% by 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT. Correspondingly, 2-year disease-specific survival were 83.3% vs. 77.8% for CE-CT and 84.6% vs. 61.9% for 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT. Tumor response on 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT was significantly associated with progression-free (HR: 3.49, P < 0.001) and disease-specific survival (HR 2.35, P = 0.008), while no association was found for tumor response on CE-CT. In conclusion, 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT appears a better predictor of progression-free and disease-specific survival than CE-CT when used to monitor metastatic breast cancer. In addition, we found low concordance between response categorization between the two modalities. Trial registration: Clinical.Trials.gov. NCT03358589. Registered 30/11/2017-Retrospectively registered, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T18:55:31Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f4a3cffc47c64126a7f865d1d81a7b21 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T18:55:31Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj.art-f4a3cffc47c64126a7f865d1d81a7b212023-04-09T11:13:24ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222023-04-011311810.1038/s41598-023-32727-w2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancerMarianne Vogsen0Mohammad Naghavi-Behzad1Frederik Graae Harbo2Nick Møldrup Jakobsen3Oke Gerke4Jon Thor Asmussen5Henriette Juel Nissen6Sara Elisabeth Dahlsgaard-Wallenius7Poul-Erik Braad8Jeanette Dupont Jensen9Marianne Ewertz10Malene Grubbe Hildebrandt11Department of Oncology, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Radiology, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Radiology, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Oncology, Odense University HospitalDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Southern DenmarkDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University HospitalAbstract This study aimed to compare CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT for response monitoring metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The primary objective was to predict progression-free and disease-specific survival for responders vs. non-responders on CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT. The secondary objective was to assess agreement between response categorization for the two modalities. Treatment response in women with MBC was monitored prospectively by simultaneous CE-CT and 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT, allowing participants to serve as their own controls. The standardized response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1) and PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST) were used for response categorization. For prediction of progression-free and disease-specific survival, treatment response was dichotomized into responders (partial and complete response) and non-responders (stable and progressive disease) at the first follow-up scan. Progression-free survival was defined as the time from baseline until disease progression or death from any cause. Disease-specific survival was defined as the time from baseline until breast cancer-specific death. Agreement between response categorization for both modalities was analyzed for all response categories and responders vs. non-responders. At the first follow-up, tumor response was reported more often by 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT than CE-CT, with only fair agreement on response categorization between the two modalities (weighted Kappa 0.28). Two-year progression-free survival for responders vs. non-responders by CE-CT was 54.2% vs. 46.0%, compared with 59.1% vs. 14.3% by 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT. Correspondingly, 2-year disease-specific survival were 83.3% vs. 77.8% for CE-CT and 84.6% vs. 61.9% for 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT. Tumor response on 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT was significantly associated with progression-free (HR: 3.49, P < 0.001) and disease-specific survival (HR 2.35, P = 0.008), while no association was found for tumor response on CE-CT. In conclusion, 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT appears a better predictor of progression-free and disease-specific survival than CE-CT when used to monitor metastatic breast cancer. In addition, we found low concordance between response categorization between the two modalities. Trial registration: Clinical.Trials.gov. NCT03358589. Registered 30/11/2017-Retrospectively registered, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32727-w |
| spellingShingle | Marianne Vogsen Mohammad Naghavi-Behzad Frederik Graae Harbo Nick Møldrup Jakobsen Oke Gerke Jon Thor Asmussen Henriette Juel Nissen Sara Elisabeth Dahlsgaard-Wallenius Poul-Erik Braad Jeanette Dupont Jensen Marianne Ewertz Malene Grubbe Hildebrandt 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer Scientific Reports |
| title | 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer |
| title_full | 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer |
| title_fullStr | 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer |
| title_full_unstemmed | 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer |
| title_short | 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT is a better predictor of survival than conventional CT: a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer |
| title_sort | 2 18f fdg pet ct is a better predictor of survival than conventional ct a prospective study of response monitoring in metastatic breast cancer |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32727-w |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mariannevogsen 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT mohammadnaghavibehzad 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT frederikgraaeharbo 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT nickmøldrupjakobsen 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT okegerke 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT jonthorasmussen 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT henriettejuelnissen 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT saraelisabethdahlsgaardwallenius 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT poulerikbraad 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT jeanettedupontjensen 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT marianneewertz 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer AT malenegrubbehildebrandt 218ffdgpetctisabetterpredictorofsurvivalthanconventionalctaprospectivestudyofresponsemonitoringinmetastaticbreastcancer |