Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T13:58:58.368Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of FDG-PET/CT on restaging and response evaluation of locally advanced head and neck cancer patient management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2021

Rabab A Moneim Open the ORCID record for Rabab A Moneim [Opens in a new window] ,
Emmad Habib ,
Radfan Nagi ,
M Yasser  and
Moustafa Aldaly
Rabab A Moneim*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Oncology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
Emmad Habib
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Oncology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
Radfan Nagi
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Oncology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
M Yasser
Affiliation:
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
Moustafa Aldaly
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Oncology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
*
Author for correspondence: Dr. Rabab A Moneim, Clinical Oncology, Cairo University, Egypt. E-mail: dr.rababahmed2014@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Head and neck cancer (HNC) accounts for 5% of all new cancer cases and most were locally advanced. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in radiotherapy practice in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is being used in staging and proper contouring. Proper staging is essential for accurate treatment decision.

Methods:

This is a prospective phase II study conducted as a single institute centre to evaluate the role of PET/CT-treatment in staging, contouring and response evaluation of 30 patients with locally advanced HNSCC in contrast to CT scan. Our cases did not undergo radical surgery for the primary tumour, and biopsy was taken with PET/CT post-treatment to evaluate response.

Results:

Median age of patients was 49·4 years (minimum age of 32 years and maximum of 68 years). Males were predominant 22 (73·3%). Nasopharynx was the predominant site 16/30 (53·3%). PET/CT changed the overall staging in 40% of the patients (upstaged in 36·7% and downstaged in 3·3%). Gross tumour volume (GTV) of PET/CT was smaller in 23 patients (76·7%) and larger in 5 (16·7%) than the GTV of conventional CT, whereas GTV of lymph nodes of PET/CT was larger in 20 patients (67·7%) and smaller in 4 (13·3%). PET/CT study detected bone metastasis in two nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients and two cases of 2nd primary tumours which were not detected using conventional CT. The Cox-regression model showed that the median standardised uptake volume (SUV) of the initial tumour had been a dependent predictor of death in patients with HNSCC (p-value = 0·033) where the risk of death was 0·725 times among patients with high SUV of the initial tumour. Consequently, the size of GTV of the tumour was significant in the prediction of death (p = 0·018).

Conclusions:

18F-FDG-PET/CT is useful for staging, radiotherapy delineation as well as aiding proper decision making, in addition to assessment of treatment response in HNSCC patients.

Keywords

locally advanced (HNC)PET/CTradiation therapysquamous cell carcinomastaging
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , September 2022 , pp. 393 - 402
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

AIOM (2016). AIRTUM. I numeri del cancer in Italia. Il Pensiero Scientifico 2016; 15: 4742–4724.Google Scholar
Siegel, RL, Miller, KD, Jemal, A. Cancer Statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 2017; 67 (1): 7–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scarsbrook, A, Chuter, R, Prestwich, R et al. Epub 2016 Aug 3. The use of deformable image registration to Integrate diagnostic MRI into the radiotherapy planning pathway for head and neck cancer. Radiotherapy Oncol 2017; 122 (2): 229235. doi: 10.1016/j. radonc.2016.07.0 Google Scholar
Marur, S, Forastiere, AA. Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: update on epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Mayo Clin Proc 2016; 91 (3): 386–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wuthrick, EJ, Zhang, Q, Machtay, M et al. Institutional clinical trial accrual volume and survival of patients with head and neck cancer. J Clin Oncol 2016; 33 (2): 156–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wong AG, W.L. (ed.), Springer International Publishing PET/CT in Head and Neck Cancer, Clinicians’ Guides to Radionuclide Hybrid Imaging, 2018; 29. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-61440-3_5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edge, SB, Compton, CC. The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17: 1471–1474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mehanna, H, Wong, WL, McConkey, CC et al. PET-CT surveillance versus neck dissection in advanced head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 2016; 374: 1444–1454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheikhbahaei, S, Taghipour, M, Ahmad, R et al. Diagnostic accuracy of follow-up FDG PET or PET/CT in patients with head and neck cancer after definitive treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AJR 2015; 205: 629–639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Demir, B, Okutan, M, Demir, M et al. Pozitron emisyon tomografive radyoterapi tedavi planlama. Turk Onkoloji Dergisi 2013; 24: 88–97.Google Scholar
Zhang, B, Li, X, Lu, X. Standardized uptake value is of prognostic value for outcome in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Acta Otolaryngol 2010; 130: 756–762.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xie, P, Li, M, Zhao, H, Sun, X, Fu, Z, Yu, J. 18F-FDG PET or PET-CT to evaluate prognosis for head and neck cancer: a metaanalysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2011; 137: 1085–1093.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grégoire, V, Evans, M, Bourhis, J, Budach, V. Delineation of the primary tumour Clinical Target Volumes (CTV-P) in laryngeal, hypopharyngeal, oropharyngeal and oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma: AIRO, CACA, DAHANCA, EORTC, GEORCC, GORTEC, HKNPCSG, HNCIG, IAG-KHT, LPRHHT, NCIC CTG, NCRI, NRG Oncology, PHNS, SBRT, SOMERA, SRO, SSHNO, TROG consensus guidelines. 2018; 126 (1): 3–24. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.10.016. Epub 2017 Nov 24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nancy, L, Harris, J, Garden, AS et al. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy with or without chemotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: radiation therapy oncology group phase II trial 0225. 2009; 27 (22): 3684–3690. Published online 2009 Jun 29. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.9109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcus, C, Ciarallo, A, Tahari, AK et al. Head and neck PET/CT:therapy response interpretation criteria (Hopkins criteria)—interreader reliability, accuracy, and survival outcomes. J Nucl Med 2014; 55: 1411–1416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
El-Khodary, M, Tabashy, R, Omar, W, Mousa, A, Mostafa, A. The role of PET/CT in the management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2011; 42 (2): 157–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abramyuk, A, Appold, S, Zöphel, K, Baumann, M, Abolmaali, N. Modification of staging and treatment of head and neck cancer by FDG-PET/CT prior to radiotherapy. Strahlen ther Oncol 2013; 189 (3): 197–201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dietl, B, Marienhagen, J, Kuhnel, T et al. The impact of FDGPET/CT on the management of head and neck tumors: the radiotherapist’s perspective. Oral Oncol 2008; 44: 504–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, GZ, Guan, DJ, He, ZY. (18) FDG-PET/CT for detecting distant metastases and second primary cancers in patients with head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis. Oral Oncol 2011; 47: 560–565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmid, DT, Stoeckli, SJ, Bandhauer, F et al. Impact of positron emission tomography on the initial staging and therapy in locoregional advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Laryngoscope 2003; 113 (5): 888–891 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zimny, M, Wildberger, JE, Cremerius, U et al. Combined image interpretation of computed tomography and hybrid PET in head and neck cancer (abstract). Nuklearmed 2002; 41: 14–21.Google Scholar
Sonay, A, Abakay, CD, Sen, F et al. Role of PET/CT in treatment planning for head and neck cancer patients undergoing definitive radiotherapy. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014; 15 (24): 10899–10903.Google Scholar
Besenyi, Z, Hideghety, K, Lengyel, Z, et al. Comparison of 18F-FDG-PET/CT and CT tumour volume delineation in head and neck cancer patients. Nucl Med Radiat Ther 2018; 9: 2.Google Scholar
Yao, M, Graham, MM, Hoffman, HT et al. The role of post-radiation therapy FDG PET in prediction of necessity for post-radiation therapy neck dissection in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59: 1001–1010.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zheng, XK, Chen, LH, Wang, QS et al. Influence of (18F) fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on salvage treatment decision making for locally persistent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 65: 1020–1025.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chan, S-C, Yen, T-C, Chang, JT-C et al. Staging of untreated nasopharyngeal carcinoma with PET/CT: comparison with conventional imaging work-up. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36 (1): 12–22.Google Scholar
Dimri, K, Pandey, AK, Trehan, R, Rai, B, Kumar, A. Conventional radiotherapy with concurrent weekly Cisplatin in locally advanced head and neck cancers of squamous cell origin - a single institution experience. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013; 14 (11): 6883–6888.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed