Two-grade metabolic tumor tissue assessment using positron emission tomography in prediction of overall survival in glioblastoma patients

Silvija Lučić; Igor Djan; Viktorija Vučaj-Ćirilović; Dragana Radovanović; Dejan Kozarski; Li Sen; Vladimir Y. Ussov; Miloš A. Lučić

doi:10.2298/VSP200330062L

Silvija Lučić University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Igor Djan University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Viktorija Vučaj-Ćirilović University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Dragana Radovanović University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia
Dejan Kozarski Oncology Institute of Vojvodina, Diagnostic Imaging Center, Novi Sad
Li Sen Cancer Hospital of China Medical University, Liaoning Cancer Hospital, Medical Imaging Department, Shenyang, Liaoning Province, People’s Republic of China
Vladimir Y. Ussov Russian Academy of Sciences, National Research Polytechnic University, Scientific Research Institute of Cardiology, National Research Medical Center, Tomsk, Russia
Miloš A. Lučić University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Medicine, Novi Sad, Serbia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP200330062L

Keywords: brain neoplasms;, glioblastoma;, positron-emission tomography;, prognosis;, survival analysis;, tomography, x-ray computed

Abstract

Background/Aim. Although considered rare, gliomas cause morbidity and mortality disproportionate to their incidence. The aim of the study was to determine whether pre and post-therapeutic metric values, derived from the FDG PET/CT maximal standardized uptake value (SUV_max) and calculated ratios between tumor and normal brain tissue, may provide a predictive/prognostic biomarker information in estimating overall survival of glioblastoma patients. Methods. In 26 out of 31 patients with glioblastoma treated with standard Stupp protocol after maximal safe reductive surgery, we performed a baseline 18F-FDG PET/CT examination before commencing combined and concomitant chemotherapy/radiotherapy (pre-therapy FDG PET/CT) and a second examination three months after the therapy completion (post-therapy FDG PET/CT). Two-graded SUV_max values and a calculated ratio of uptake in tumor-to-normal-tissue (T/N ratio) value, divided into two grades by the calculated cut-off value, were measured in all patients at both pre- and post-therapy FDG PET/CT studies. Data sets were statistically analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier survival test and Log-rank was calculated, with the level of confidence determined at p < 0.05. Results. Pre-therapy FDG PET/CT two-grade T/N ratio value and both pre- and post-therapy FDG PET/CT derived two-grade SUV_max values had a strong predictive impact on overall survival of glioblastoma patients. Conclusion. Based on two-grade SUV_max and T/N ratio values assessment, FDG PET/CT could provide valuable predictive survival information in glioblastoma patients and serve as a selection tool for identifying patients at higher risk from worse outcomes and shorter survival time.

References

Leece R, Xu J, Ostrom QT, Chen Y, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS. Global incidence of malignant brain and other central nervous system tumors by hystology, 2003-2007. Neuro On-col 2017;19(11): 1553–64.

Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Liao P, Rouse C, Chen Y, Dowling J, et al. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nerv-ous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2007-2011. Neuro Oncol 2014; 16(Suppl 4): iv1‒63.

Stupp R, Brada M, van den Bent MJ, Tonn JC, Pentheroudakis G. ESMO Guidelines Working Group. High-grade glioma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2014; 25(Suppl 3): iii93‒101.

Weller M, van den Bent M, Tonn JC, Stupp R, Preusser M, Cohen-Jonathan-Moyal E, et al. European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) guideline on the diagnosis and treatment of adult astrocytic and oligodendroglial gliomas. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18(6): e315‒29.

Koshy M, Villano JL, Dolecek TA, Howard A, Mahmood U, Chmura SJ, et al. Improved survival time trends of glioblasto-ma using the SEER 17 population-based registries. J Neuro Oncol 2012; 107(1): 207–12.

Vogelbaum MA, Jost S, Aghi MK, Heimberger AB, Sampson JH, Wen PY, et al. Application of novel response/progression measures for surgically delivered therapies for gliomas: Re-sponse Assessment in Neuro Oncology (RANO) Working Group. Neurosurgery 2012; 70(1): 234‒43; discussion 243‒4.

Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ, Giammarile F, Tatsch K, Eschner W, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imagin 2015; 42(2): 328–54.

Albert NL, Weller M, Suchorska B, Galldiks N, Soffietti R, Kim MM, et al. Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology working group and European Association for Neuro-Oncology recom-mendations for the clinical use of PET imaging in gliomas. Neuro Oncol 2016; 18(9): 1199‒208.

Langen KJ, Galldiks N, Hattingen E, Shah NJ. Advances in neu-ro-oncology imaging. Nat Rev Neurol 2017; 13(5): 279‒89.

Hanson MW, Glantz MJ, Hoffman JM, Friedman AH, Burger PC, Schold SC, et al. FDG-PET in the selection of brain lesions for biopsy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1991; 15(5): 796‒801.

Levivier M, Goldman S, Bidaut LM, Luxen A, Stanus E, Przedborski S, et al. Positron emission tomography-guided ste-reotactic brain biopsy. Neurosurgery 1992; 31(4): 792‒7.

Chao ST, Suh JH, Raja S, Lee SY, Barnett G. The sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET in distinguishing recurrent brain tumor from radionecrosis in patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery. Int J Cancer 2001; 96(3): 191‒7.

Enslow MS, Zollinger LV, Morton KA, Butterfield RI, Kadrmas DJ, Christian PE, et al. Comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 18F-fluorothymidine PET in differ-entiating radiation necrosis from recurrent glioma. Clin Nucl Med 2012; 37(9): 854–61.

De Witte O, Lefranc F, Levivier M, Salmon I, Brotchi J, Goldman S. FDG-PET as a prognostic factor in high-grade astrocytoma. J Neurooncol 2000; 49(2): 157–63.

Alavi JB, Alavi A, Chawluk J, Kushner M, Powe J, Hickey W, et al. Positron emission tomography in patients with glioma. A predictor of prognosis. Cancer 1988; 62(6): 1074–8.

Barker FG 2nd, Chang SM, Valk PE, Pounds TR, Prados MD. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and survival of patients with suspected recurrent malignant glioma. Cancer 1997; 79(1): 115‒26.

Padma MV, Said S, Jacobs M, Hwang DR, Dunigan K, Satter M, et al. Prediction of pathology and survival by FDG PET in gliomas. J Neurooncol 2003; 64(3): 227–37.

Spence AM, Muzi M, Graham MM, O'Sullivan F, Link JM, Lew-ellen TK, et al. 2-(18F)Fluoro-2-deoxyglucose and glucose up-take in malignant gliomas before and after radiotherapy: corre-lation with outcome. Clin Cancer Res 2002; 8(4): 971–9.

Colavolpe C, Guedj E, Metellus P, Barrie M, Figarella-Branger D, Mundler O, et al. FDG-PET to predict different patterns of progression in multicentric glioblastoma: a case report. J Neu-rooncol 2008; 90(1): 47–51.

Moreau A, Febvey O, Mognetti T, Frappaz D, Kryza D. Contribu-tion of Different Positron Emission Tomography Tracers in Glioma Management: Focus on Glioblastoma. Front Oncol 2019; 9: 1134.

Chiang GC, Galla N, Ferraro R, Kovanlikaya I. The Added Prognostic Value of Metabolic Tumor Size on FDG-PET at First Suspected Recurrence of Glioblastoma Multiforme. J Neuroimaging 2017; 27(2): 243‒7.

Lopci E, Riva M, Olivari L, Raneri F, Soffietti R, Piccardo A, et al. Prognostic value of molecular and imaging biomarkers in patients with supratentorial glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Im-aging 2017; 44(7): 1155‒64.

Kim D, Kim S, Kim SH, Chang JH, Yun M. Prediction of Over-all Survival Based on Isocitrate Dehydrogenase 1 Mutation and 18F-FDG Uptake on PET/CT in Patients With Cerebral Gliomas. Clin Nucl Med 2018; 43(5): 311‒6.

Miyake K, Ogawa D, Okada M, Hatakeyama T, Tamiya T. Use-fulness of positron emission tomographic studies for gliomas. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2016; 56(7): 396‒408.

Dunet V, Pomoni A, Hottinger A, Nicod-Lalonde M, Prior JO. Per-formance of 18F-FET versus 18F-FDG-PET for the diagno-sis and grading of brain tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuro Oncol 2016; 18(3): 426‒34.

Ducray F, Idbaih A, Wang XW, Cheneau C, Labussiere M, Sanson M. Predictive and prognostic factors for gliomas. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2011; 11(5): 781‒9.

Gorlia T, van den Bent MJ, Hegi ME, Mirimanoff RO, Weller M, Cairncross JG, et al. Nomograms for predicting survival of pa-tients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: prognostic factor analysis of EORTC and NCIC trial 26981-22981/CE.3. Lan-cet Oncol 2008; 9(1): 29‒38.

Stupp R, Tonn JC, Brada M, Pentheroudakis G. ESMO Guide-lines Working Group. High-grade malignant glioma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and fol-low-up. Ann Oncol 2010; 21(Suppl. 5): v190‒3.

Chargari C, Feuvret L, Bauduceau O, Ricard D, Cuenca X, Delattre JY, et al. Treatment of elderly patients with glioblastoma: from clinical evidence to molecular highlights. Cancer Treat Rev 2012; 38(8): 988‒95.

Orringer D, Lau D, Khatri S, Zamora-Berridi GJ, Zhang K, Wu C, et al. Extent of resection in patients with glioblastoma: limit-ing factors, perception of resectability, and effect on survival. J Neurosurg 2012; 117(5): 851‒9.

Djan I, Lucic S, Bjelan M, Vuckovic N, Vucinic N, Morganti AG, et al. The VEGF gene polymorphism in glioblastoma may be a new prognostic marker of overall survival. J BUON 2019; 24: 2475‒82.

Colavolpe C, Metellus P, Mancini J, Barrie M, Béquet-Boucard C, Figarella-Branger D, et al. Independent prognostic value of pre-treatment 18-FDG-PET in high-grade gliomas. J Neurooncol 2012; 107(3): 527‒35.

Zhang Q, Gao X, Wei G, Qiu C, Qu H, Zhou X. Prognostic Val-ue of MTV, SUVmax and the T/N Ratio of PET/CT in Pa-tients with Glioma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cancer 2019; 10(7): 1707‒16.

Leiva-Salinas C, Schiff D, Flors L, Patrie JT, Rehm PK. FDG PET/MR Imaging Coregistration helps predict survival in pa-tients with glioblastoma and radiologic progression after standard of care Treatment. Radiology 2017; 283(2): 508–14.

Spence AM, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, O'Sullivan SF, Link JM, Lewellen TK, et al. 18F-FDG PET of gliomas at delayed inter-vals: improved distinction between tumor and normal gray Matter. J Nucl Med 2004; 45(10): 1653–9.

Galldiks N, Kracht LW, Burghaus L, Thomas A, Jacobs AH, Heiss WD, et al. Use of 11C-methionine PET to monitor the effects of temozolomide chemotherapy in malignant gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33(5): 516‒24.

Pöpperl G, Goldbrunner R, Gildehaus FJ, Kreth FW, Tanner P, Holtmannspötter M, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-Ltyrosine PET for monitoring the effects of convection-enhanced deliv-ery of paclitaxel in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32(9): 1018‒25.

Schwarzenberg J, Czernin J, Cloughesy TF, Ellingson BM, Pope WB, Grogan T, et al. Treatment Response Evaluation Using 18F-FDOPA PET in Patients with Recurrent Malignant Glioma on Bevacizumab Therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2014; 20(13): 3550‒9.

Niyazi M, Schnell O, Suchorska B, Schwarz SB, Ganswindt U, Geisler J, et al. FET-PET assessed recurrence pattern after ra-dio-chemotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with glioblas-toma is influenced by MGMT methylation status. Radiother Oncol 2012; 104(1): 78‒82.

Duprez De Neve W, De Gersem W, Coghe M, Madani I. Adap-tive dose painting by numbers for head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 80(4): 1045–55.

Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Stoffels G, Hutterer M, Rapp M, Sabel M, et al. Diagnosis of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblas-toma using O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42(5): 685‒95.