Vnitr Lek 2007, 53(9):936-941

The outcome of whole-body FDG-PET examination predicts the future of patients with diffuse large-cell lymphoma in the use of both intermediary staging and at the end of standard chemotherapy

M. Trněný1,*, O. Bělohlávek2, J. Kořen1, R. Pytlík1, J. Šálková1, P. Klener1
1 I. interní klinika 1. lékařské fakulty UK a VFN Praha, přednosta prof. MUDr. Pavel Klener, DrSc.
2 Oddělení nukleární medicíny Nemocnice Na Homolce, Praha, přednosta doc. MUDr. Otakar Bělohlávek, CSc.

Aim:
Response to the therapy is one of the most valuable prognostic factors. The response evaluation is performed by computer tomography as a standard tool. The introduction of FDG-PET whole body imaging allows to discriminate viable tumor and fibrotic changes in structural abnormalities.

Methods:
We have performed retrospective analysis of 96 patients with diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (1999-2004) who were treated by anthracyclin based chemotherapy and FDG-PET was performed as a part of intermediate restaging (after 2nd-4th cycle, 69 patients) or/and at the end of standard chemotherapy (68 patients).

Results:
The progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 3 years were the endpoints. Median follow up was 30 months. The PFS and OS resp. for PET negative pts at intermediate restaging was 80.7 % and 97.6 % compared to the 50.5 % and 71.5 % resp. for PET positive patients. The relapse risk and death risk for PET positive patients was 4.8 and 6.4 resp. The PFS and OS resp. for PET negative pts at the end of chemotherapy was 81.7 % and 94.7 % resp. compared to the 29.4 % (p < 0.0001) and 57.5 % (p < 0.0001) resp. for PET positive patients. The relapse risk and death risk for PET positive patients was 7.0 and 12.9 resp. Predictive value of PET at intermediate as well at the end restaging was observed in IPI low group as well IPI high risk subgroups for both PFS and OS, except OS in high risk subgroup at intermediate restaging.


Conslusion:
The current analysis confirms predictive PET value for patients with DLBCL at intermediate as well at the end restaging. The question if and how to use the PET findings for tailoreing of therapy remains to be answered in prospective trials.

Keywords: FDG-PET; lymphoma; DLBCL; prognosis; predictive value

Received: January 22, 2007; Accepted: January 26, 2007; Published: September 1, 2007  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Trněný M, Bělohlávek O, Kořen J, Pytlík R, Šálková J, Klener P. The outcome of whole-body FDG-PET examination predicts the future of patients with diffuse large-cell lymphoma in the use of both intermediary staging and at the end of standard chemotherapy. Vnitr Lek. 2007;53(9):936-941.
Download citation

References

  1. Becherer A, Mitterbauer M, Jaeger U et al. Positron emission tomography with [18F]2-fluoro-D-2-deoxyglucose (FDG-PET) predicts relapse of malignant lymphoma after high-dose therapy with stem cell transplantation. Leukemia 2002; 16: 260-267. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  2. Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1244. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G et al. Utility of FDG-PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood 2003; 101: 3875-3876. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Ha CS, Choe JG, Kong JS et al. Agreement rates among single photon emission computed tomography using gallium-67, computed axial tomography and lymphangiography for Hodgkin disease and correlation of image findings with clinical outcome. Cancer 2000; 89: 1371-1379. Go to original source...
  5. Haioun C, Itti E, Rahmouni A et al. [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in aggressive lymphoma: an early prognostic tool for predicting patient outcome. Blood 2005; 106: 1376-1381. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  6. Haw R, Sawka CA, Franssen E et al. Significance of a partial or slow response to front-line chemotherapy in the management of intermediate-grade or high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a literature review. Journal of Clinical Oncology 1994; 12: 1074-1084. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  7. Israel O, Mor M, Epelbaum R et al. Clinical pretreatment risk factors and Ga-67 scintigraphy early during treatment for prediction of outcome of patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer 2002; 94: 873-878. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  8. Janicek M, Kaplan W, Neuberg D et al. Early restaging gallium scans predict outcome in poor-prognosis patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma treated with high-dose CHOP chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 1631-1637. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  9. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for posttreatment evaluation in Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood 1999; 94: 429-433. Go to original source...
  10. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose compared to standard procedures for staging patients with Hodgkin's disease. Haematologica 2001; 86: 266-273. Go to PubMed...
  11. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM 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: 4652-4661. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  12. Shipp MA, Harrington DP, Anderson JR et al. A Predictive Model for Aggressive Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 987-994. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  13. Slaby J, Belohlavek O, Taborska K et al. Predictive features of positron emission tomography after two cycles of induction therapy in malignant lymphoma. Cas Lek Cesk 2002; 141: 312-315. Go to PubMed...
  14. Slaby J, Belohlavek O, Trneny M et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with malignant lymphomas - indications for the method as presented in case reports. Vnitr Lek 2001; 47(Suppl 1): 4-7.
  15. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P et al. Can positron emission tomography with [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose after first-line treatment distinguish Hodgkin's disease patients who need additional therapy from others in whom additional therapy would mean avoidable toxicity? Br J Haematol 2001; 115: 272-278. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  16. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) after first-line chemotherapy in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: is [18F]FDG-PET a valid alternative to conventional diagnostic methods? J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 414-419. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  17. Trneny M, Jaeger U, Belohlavek O et al. Early Whole Body F18-FDG Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Restaging Has Significant Prognostic Impact in Diffuse Large Cell Lymphomas (DLCL-B) and Other Aggressive Lymphomas. Blood 2002; 100: 768a.
  18. Verdonck LF, van Putten WL, Hagenbeek A et al. Comparison of CHOP chemotherapy with autologous bone marrow transplantation for slowly responding patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma [see comments]. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 1045-1051. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  19. Weihrauch MR, Re D, Scheidhauer K et al. Thoracic positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for the evaluation of residual mediastinal Hodgkin disease. Blood 2001; 98: 2930-2934. Go to original source...




Vnitřní lékařství

Madam, Sir,
please be aware that the website on which you intend to enter, not the general public because it contains technical information about medicines, including advertisements relating to medicinal products. This information and communication professionals are solely under §2 of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. Is active persons authorized to prescribe or supply (hereinafter expert).
Take note that if you are not an expert, you run the risk of danger to their health or the health of other persons, if you the obtained information improperly understood or interpreted, and especially advertising which may be part of this site, or whether you used it for self-diagnosis or medical treatment, whether in relation to each other in person or in relation to others.

I declare:

  1. that I have met the above instruction
  2. I'm an expert within the meaning of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. the regulation of advertising, as amended, and I am aware of the risks that would be a person other than the expert input to these sites exhibited


No

Yes

If your statement is not true, please be aware
that brings the risk of danger to their health or the health of others.