File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Pretreatment PET/CT imaging of angiogenesis based on 18F-RGD tracer uptake may predict antiangiogenic response

TitlePretreatment PET/CT imaging of angiogenesis based on 18F-RGD tracer uptake may predict antiangiogenic response
Authors
Keywords18 F-RGD PET/CT
Integrin αvβ3
Malignancies
Antiangiogenic therapy
Issue Date2018
Citation
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 2018 How to Cite?
Abstract© 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. Purpose: To explore the relationship between metabolic uptake of the 18F-ALF-NOTA-PRGD2 (18F-RGD) tracer on positron emission tomography/computerized tomography (PET/CT) and the antiangiogenic effect of apatinib in patients with solid malignancies. Materials and patients: Patients with measurable lesions scheduled for second- or third-line single-agent therapy with apatinib were eligible for this prospective clinical trial. All patients underwent 18F-RGD PET/CT examination before the start of treatment. Standardized uptake values (SUVs) of contoured tumor lesions were computed and compared using independent sample t-tests or the Mann–Whitney U test. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine accuracy in predicting response. Survival curves were compared using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Of 38 patients who consented to study participation, 25 patients with 42 measurable lesions met the criteria for inclusion in this response assessment analysis. The median follow-up time was 3 months (range, 1–10 months), and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3 months (95% confidence interval, 1.04–4.96). The SUVpeak and SUVmean were significantly higher in responding tumors than in non-responding tumors (4.98 ± 2.34 vs 3.59 ± 1.44, p = 0.048; 3.71 ± 1.15 vs 2.95 ± 0.49, P = 0.036). SUVmax did not differ between responding tumors and non-responding tumors (6.58 ± 3.33 vs 4.74 ± 1.83, P = 0.078). An exploratory ROC curve analysis indicated that SUVmean [area under the ROC curve (AUC) = 0.700] was a better parameter than SUVpeak (AUC = 0.689) for predicting response. Using a threshold value of 3.82, high SUVmean at baseline was associated with improved PFS (5.0 vs. 3.4 months, log-rank P = 0.036). Conclusion: 18F-RGD uptake on PET/CT imaging pretreatment may predict the response to antiangiogenic therapy, with higher 18F-RGD uptake in tumors predicting a better response to apatinib therapy.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/267112
ISSN
2017 Impact Factor: 7.704
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.080

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLi, Li-
dc.contributor.authorMa, Li-
dc.contributor.authorShang, Dongping-
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Zhiguo-
dc.contributor.authorYu, Qingxi-
dc.contributor.authorWang, Suzhen-
dc.contributor.authorTeng, Xuepeng-
dc.contributor.authorZhang, Qiang-
dc.contributor.authorHu, Xudong-
dc.contributor.authorZhao, Wei-
dc.contributor.authorHou, Wenhong-
dc.contributor.authorJin, Jianyue-
dc.contributor.authorKong, Feng Ming (Spring)-
dc.contributor.authorYu, Jinming-
dc.contributor.authorYuan, Shuanghu-
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-31T07:20:33Z-
dc.date.available2019-01-31T07:20:33Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 2018-
dc.identifier.issn1619-7070-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/267112-
dc.description.abstract© 2018, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. Purpose: To explore the relationship between metabolic uptake of the 18F-ALF-NOTA-PRGD2 (18F-RGD) tracer on positron emission tomography/computerized tomography (PET/CT) and the antiangiogenic effect of apatinib in patients with solid malignancies. Materials and patients: Patients with measurable lesions scheduled for second- or third-line single-agent therapy with apatinib were eligible for this prospective clinical trial. All patients underwent 18F-RGD PET/CT examination before the start of treatment. Standardized uptake values (SUVs) of contoured tumor lesions were computed and compared using independent sample t-tests or the Mann–Whitney U test. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to determine accuracy in predicting response. Survival curves were compared using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Of 38 patients who consented to study participation, 25 patients with 42 measurable lesions met the criteria for inclusion in this response assessment analysis. The median follow-up time was 3 months (range, 1–10 months), and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3 months (95% confidence interval, 1.04–4.96). The SUVpeak and SUVmean were significantly higher in responding tumors than in non-responding tumors (4.98 ± 2.34 vs 3.59 ± 1.44, p = 0.048; 3.71 ± 1.15 vs 2.95 ± 0.49, P = 0.036). SUVmax did not differ between responding tumors and non-responding tumors (6.58 ± 3.33 vs 4.74 ± 1.83, P = 0.078). An exploratory ROC curve analysis indicated that SUVmean [area under the ROC curve (AUC) = 0.700] was a better parameter than SUVpeak (AUC = 0.689) for predicting response. Using a threshold value of 3.82, high SUVmean at baseline was associated with improved PFS (5.0 vs. 3.4 months, log-rank P = 0.036). Conclusion: 18F-RGD uptake on PET/CT imaging pretreatment may predict the response to antiangiogenic therapy, with higher 18F-RGD uptake in tumors predicting a better response to apatinib therapy.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging-
dc.subject18 F-RGD PET/CT-
dc.subjectIntegrin αvβ3-
dc.subjectMalignancies-
dc.subjectAntiangiogenic therapy-
dc.titlePretreatment PET/CT imaging of angiogenesis based on 18F-RGD tracer uptake may predict antiangiogenic response-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00259-018-4143-8-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85053449716-
dc.identifier.spagenull-
dc.identifier.epagenull-
dc.identifier.eissn1619-7089-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats