medigraphic.com

2017, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Anales de Radiología México 2017; 16 (1)

Combination of simple and positron emission tomography in evaluating early response to treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

Maldonado-Ramírez GA, Ramírez-Arango J, Criales-Vera SA, Criales-Cortés JL

Language: Spanish
References: 28
Page: 31-42
PDF size: 379.08 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is part of a heterogeneous group of hematopoietic tumors which appear in the lymph nodes, in lymphatic tissues of certain organs, or in both sites. They originate in the proliferation of lymph cells arrested in various stages of their maturational development. Positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) plays an important part in its initial staging, in identification of relapse, and in evaluation of response to treatment. Early assessment of the efficacy of treatment would help change therapy opportunely and achieve a better result with higher patient survival when there is poor response to chemotherapy.
Objetive: evaluate the prevalence of response using a combination of simple and positron emission tomography, with 18F-FDG, following the first cycles of chemotherapy. Conduct a review of the specialized medical literature.
Material and Methods: we conducted a transverse and descriptive study. All patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma who were attended at the CT Scanner del Sur Image Diagnosis Center, in the tomography department, and presented high metabolic activity (SUVmax between 8.8 and 26 g/mL) in the period from July 2014 to July 2015 were included. All subjects underwent a baseline study for staging and another after their first cycles of chemotherapy to evaluate their response to treatment.
Results: using simple and positron emission tomography (with 18FFDG), we found data indicative of complete metabolic response in 19% of the patients, partial metabolic response in 62%, stable disease in 19%, and no relapse.
Conclusions: the prevalence of complete metabolic response was 19%. Simple and positron emission tomography with 18F-FDG, following the first cycles of chemotherapy, is useful to monitor treatment due to its high negative predictive value, which is a good indicator, especially in patients who achieve a complete metabolic response.


REFERENCES

  1. Schoder H, Noy A, Gonen M y cols. Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4643–4651.

  2. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) / World Health Organization. GLOBOCAN 2012: Estimated cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2012. http://globocan.iarc.fr/Default.aspx.

  3. Tirado L, Mohar A. Epidemiología de las Neoplasias Hematológicas. Revista Instituto Nacional de Cancerología. 2007;2:109-120.

  4. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M y cols. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2011. NationalCancer Institute. http://seer. cancer.gov/csr/1975_2011/, based on November 2013 SEER data submission.

  5. Hartge P, Wang SS, Bracci PM y cols. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer epidemiology and prevention, 2006;3:898–918.

  6. Christoffer T, Galaly E, Hutchings M. Imaging of Non- Hodgkin Lymphomas: Diagnosis and Response-Adapted Strategies. Springer International Publishing Switzerland. 2015;3:314-319.

  7. Van Besien K, Cabanillas F. Clinical manifestations, staging and treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Hematology principles and practice. Churchill Livingstone. 2000;1293- 1339.

  8. Gribben JG, Steward A. Clinical manifestations, staging and treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Hematology principles and practice. Churchill Livingstone. 2005;1397-1419.

  9. Yuliya S, David S. The Role of PET in Lymphoma. J Nucl Med 2006; 47:1326–1334.

  10. Hutchings M. PET/CT for Therapy Response Assessment in Lymphoma. J Nucl Med 2009;50:21–30.

  11. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M y cols. Different histopathological subtypes of Hodgkin lymphoma show significantly different levels of FDG uptake. Hematol Oncol 2006;24:146–150.

  12. Kako S, Izutsu K, Ota Y y cols. FDG PET in T-cell and NK-cell neoplasms. Ann Oncol 2007;18:1685–1690.

  13. Hutchings M, Barrington S. FDG-PET for the early treatment monitoring, for final response and follow-up evaluation in lymphoma. Clin Transl Imaging. 2015;3:271–281.

  14. Cortés M, Gámez C, Caresia A y cols. Utilidad de la PET-TC en la valoración de la respuesta precoz al tratamiento en el linfoma B difuso de celula grande. Resultados preliminaries. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2012;31(3):135–141.

  15. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS y cols. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: Consensus of the imaging subcommittee of international harmonization project in lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:571–578.

  16. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM. 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.

  17. Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G y cols. Utility of FDG PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood 2003;101:3875–3896.

  18. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont y cols. Early staging positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2002;13:1356–1363.

  19. Ramos-Font C, Rebollo A, Villegas R, y cols. Tomografía de positrones con 18F- fluorodesoxiglucosa en la valoración de la respuesta al tratamiento de los linfomas. Revisión sistemática de la literatura y metanálisis. Rev Esp Med Nucl. 2009;8:48–55.

  20. Cheson B, Pfistner B, Juweid ME y cols. Revised Response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:579–586.

  21. Hutchings M. FDG-PET Response–adapted Therapy Is 18FFluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography a Safe Predictor for a Change of Therapy? Hematol Oncol Clin N Am. 2014;28:87–103.

  22. Kinahan P. Fletcher J. PET/CT Standardized Uptake Values (SUVs) in Clinical Practice and Assessing Response to Therapy. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010 December; 31(6):496–505.

  23. Jacene H, Filice R, Kasecamp W y cols. 18F-FDG PET/CT for Monitoring the Response of Lymphoma to Radioimmunotherapy. J Nucl Med 2009;50:8–17.

  24. Kostakoglu L. Coleman M, Leonard J y cols. PET Predicts Prognosis After 1 Cycle of Chemotherapy in Aggressive Lymphoma and Hodgkin’s Disease. J Nucl Med 2002;43:1018–1027.

  25. Cashen A, Dehdashti F, Luo Jinggin y cols. 18F-FDG PET/CT for Early Response Assessment in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Poor Predictive Value of International Harmonization Project Interpretation. J Nucl Med 2011;52:386–392.

  26. Mikhaeel NG, Hutchings M, Fields PA y cols. FDG-PET after two to three cycles of chemotherapy predicts progressionfree and overall survival in high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2005;16:1514–1523.

  27. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, y cols. FDG-PET after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts treatment failure and progression- free survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2006;107:52–59.

  28. Cheson B. The International Harmonization Project for Response Criteria in Lymphoma clinical trials. Hemotol Oncolo Clinic North Am. 2007;21:841-854.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com