Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

PET/CT predicts survival in patients undergoing primary surgery for esophageal cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (PET/CT) is increasingly being used in the staging of esophageal cancer, and some recent studies suggested the maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) as a prognostic factor for prediction of survival of these patients. However, data on correlations between SUVmax and other established prognostic markers is rare, and the impact of neoadjuvant treatment on SUVmax ability to predict outcome is not clear. The aim of the present study was therefore to evaluate the prognostic significance of the SUVmax in patients with or without neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) by comparing SUVmax to different established prognostic factors and survival.

Methods

Esophageal cancer patients receiving either neoadjuvant therapy or no pretreatment before surgery were included in our study, and correlations between SUVmax and prognostic factors such as tumour/nodal stage, grading, tumour length or survival were investigated.

Results

Between January 2004 and December 2011, a total of 114 patients was included (mean age 63 years, 96 men, 36 SCC, 78 adenocarcinoma). A number of 74 patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy. The median follow-up was 52 months. The SUVmax was significantly correlated to initial tumour stage (p = 0.000) and tumour length (p ≤ 0.010). Survival was significantly better in patients undergoing primary surgery if SUVmax was <6 compared to SUVmax >6 (p = 0.008), whereas neither neoadjuvant-treated patients in general (p = 0.950) nor the different subgroups of responders showed a comparable correlation between survival and SUVmax (complete responder p = 0.808, partial responder p = 0.409, nonresponder p = 0.529).

Conclusion

The SUVmax highly correlates with well-known prognostic factors and survival of esophageal cancer patients after surgery but only in case of primary surgery and not if patients received neoadjuvant therapy.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yuequan J, Shifeng C, Bing Z (2010) Prognostic factors and family history for survival of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients after surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 90:908–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stein HJ, Feith M, Bruecher BL et al (2005) Early esophageal cancer: pattern of lymphatic spread and prognostic factors for long-term survival after surgical resection. Ann Surg 242:566–573

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee PC, Port JL, Paul S et al (2009) Predictors of long-term survival after resection of esophageal carcinoma with nonregional nodal metastases. Ann Thorac Surg 88:186–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lagarde SM, Ten Kate FJ, Reitsma JB et al (2006) Prognostic factors in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. J Clin Oncol 24:4347–4355

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Karaosmanoğlu AD, Blake MA (2012) Applications of PET-CT in patients with esophageal cancer. Diagn Interv Radiol 18:171–182

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Marzola MC, De Manzoni G, Grassetto G et al (2010) Extended staging of oesophageal cancer using FDG-PET—a critical appraisal. Eur J Radiol 81:21–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Noble F, Bailey D, Tung K et al (2009) Impact of integrated PET/CT in the staging of oesophageal cancer: a UK population-based cohort study. Clin Radiol 64:699–705

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chatterton BE, Ho Shon I, Baldey A et al (2009) Positron emission tomography changes management and prognostic stratification in patients with oesophageal cancer: results of a multicentre prospective study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36:354–361

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rizk NP, Tang L, Adusumilli P et al (2009) Predictive value of initial PET-SUVmax in patients with locally advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol 4:875–879

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kato H, Nakajima M, Sohda M et al (2009) The clinical application of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to predict survival in patients with operable esophageal cancer. Cancer 115:3196–3203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shenfine J, Barbour AP, Wong D et al (2009) Prognostic value of maximum standardized uptake values from preoperative positron emission tomography in resectable adenocarcinoma of the esophagus treated by surgery alone. Dis Esophagus 22:668–675

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pan L, Gu P, Huang G et al (2009) Prognostic significance of SUV on PET/CT in patients with esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 21:1008–1015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Thurau K, Palmes D, Franzius C et al (2011) Impact of PET-CT on primary staging and response control on multimodal treatment of esophageal cancer. World J Surg 35:608–616

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kwon SJ (2011) Evaluation of the 7th UICC TNM staging system of gastric cancer. J Gastric Cancer 11:78–85

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee JR, Madsen MT, Bushnel D et al (2000) A threshold method to improve standardized uptake value reproducibility. Nucl Med Commun 21:685–690

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chan DS, Fielding P, Roberts SA et al (2013) (2012) Prognostic significance of 18-FDG PET/CT and EUS-defined tumour characteristics in patients with oesophageal cancer. Clin Radiol 68:352–357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gillies RS, Middleton MR, Han C, et al. Role of positron emission tomography-computed tomography in predicting survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg 99:239–245

  18. Twine CP, Roberts SA, Rawlinson CE et al (2010) Prognostic significance of the endoscopic ultrasound defined lymph node metastasis count in esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus 23:652–659

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Omloo JM, Sloof GW, Boellaard R et al (2008) Importance of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) and endoscopic ultrasonography parameters in predicting survival following surgery for esophageal cancer. Endoscopy 40:464–471

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cheze-Le Rest C, Metges JP, Teyton P et al (2008) Prognostic value of initial fluorodeoxyglucose-PET in esophageal cancer: a prospective study. Nucl Med Commun 29:628–635

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Shum WY, Ding HJ, Liang JA et al (2012) Use of pretreatment metabolic tumor volumes on PET-CT to predict the survival of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of esophagus treated by curative surgery. Anticancer Res 32:4163–4168

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Choi JY, Jang KT, Shim YM et al (2006) Prognostic significance of vascular endothelial growth factor expression and microvessel density in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison with positron emission tomography. Ann Surg Oncol 13:1054–1062

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Westerterp M, Sloof GW, Hoekstra OS et al (2008) 18FDG uptake in oesophageal adenocarcinoma: linking biology and outcome. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 134:227–236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS (2006) Maximum standardized uptake values on positron emission tomography of esophageal cancer predicts stage, tumor biology, and survival. AnnThorac Surg 82:391–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rizk N, Downey RJ, Akhurst T et al (2006) Preoperative 18[F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography standardized uptake values predict survival after esophageal adenocarcinoma resection. Ann Thorac Surg 81:1076–1081

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sepesi B, Raymond DP, Polomsky M et al (2009) Does the value of PET-CT extend beyond pretreatment staging? An analysis of survival in surgical patients with esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 13:2121–2127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hatt M, Le Pogam A, Visvikis D et al (2012) Impact of partial-volume effect correction on the predictive and prognostic value of baseline 18F-FDG PET images in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med 53:12–20

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Brown C, Howes B, Jamieson GG et al (2012) Accuracy of PET-CT in predicting survival in patients with esophageal cancer. World J Surg 36:1089–1095

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kobayashi M, Kaida H, Kawahara A et al (2012) The relationship between GLUT-1 and vascular endothelial growth factor expression and 18F-FDG uptake in esophageal squamous cell cancer patients. Clin Nucl Med 37:447–452

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kutup A, Link BC, Schurr PG et al (2007) Quality control of endoscopic ultrasound in preoperative staging of esophageal cancer. Endoscopy 9:715–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shimpi RA, George J, Jowell P et al (2007) Staging of esophageal cancer by EUS: staging accuracy revisited. Gastrointest Endosc 66:475–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors’ contributions

Kirsten Lindner contributed to the study conception and design, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data and drafting of the manuscript.

Daniel Palmes contributed to the study conception and critical revision of manuscript.

Norbert Senninger contributed to the critical revision of manuscript.

Richard Hummel contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data, drafting and revision of manuscript.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Muenster University Hospital, Waldeyerstr. 1, 48149, Muenster, Germany

    Kirsten Lindner, Daniel Palmes, Norbert Senninger & Richard Hummel

Authors
  1. Kirsten Lindner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Palmes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Norbert Senninger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Richard Hummel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Palmes.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOCX 296 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lindner, K., Palmes, D., Senninger, N. et al. PET/CT predicts survival in patients undergoing primary surgery for esophageal cancer. Langenbecks Arch Surg 400, 229–235 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1264-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1264-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation