FDG-PET/CT in predicting aggressiveness of rectal cancer
Abstract Background Treatment response varies significantly among rectal cancer patients. Tumor can show complete regression, stationary appearance, or even tumour progression during the treatment. It is also widely known that the rate of local recurrence is variable. Precise risk stratification of...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
SpringerOpen
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/771c2b7e7cc641bb8e1095f145bb5d00 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Abstract Background Treatment response varies significantly among rectal cancer patients. Tumor can show complete regression, stationary appearance, or even tumour progression during the treatment. It is also widely known that the rate of local recurrence is variable. Precise risk stratification of tumor aggressiveness is required for better per patient tailored treatment plan and predicting the overall prognosis of rectal cancer patients The aim of this study was to assess different parameters of baseline [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography [(18F) FDG-PET/CT] as a non-invasive tool in predicting aggressiveness of the rectal cancer. Results Overall, 33 patients were included [19 moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma, 10 poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma and 4 mucinous adenocarcinomas (MAC)]. SUV estimates (SUV max, SUV mean) were greater in the moderately adenocarcinoma group (p = 0.003 and p = 0.019, respectively). MTV and TLG values were similar between the three histopathological groups (p = 0.763 and p = 0.701, respectively). There was no correlation between SUVmax of primary tumor and MTV (r = 0.034; p = 0.849). However, SUVmax and TLG were significantly correlated (r = 0.517; p = 0.002). Strong correlation between tumor size and MTV (r = 0.489; p = 0.003), and TLG (r = 0.506; p = 0.003) were observed. No significant association was found between MTV and TLG and the clinical stage of rectal cancer. Conclusion Baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters cannot be used alone as a non-invasive diagnostic technique in assessing aggressiveness and prognosis in patients with primary rectal cancer, and further clinical studies are needed before considering the prognostic role of FDG-PET/CT in rectal cancer. |
|---|