Home    中文  
 
  • Search
  • lucene Search
  • Citation
  • Fig/Tab
  • Adv Search
Just Accepted  |  Current Issue  |  Archive  |  Featured Articles  |  Most Read  |  Most Download  |  Most Cited

Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition) ›› 2018, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (08): 432-439. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-0785.2018.08.002

Special Issue:

• Nuclear Medicine • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Predictive value of 18F-FDG PET/CT metabolic parameters in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors

Nan Li1, Yang Fan1, Shizhen Zhai1, Xiangping Guan1, Jiangyuan Yu1, Nina Zhou1, Rui Guo1, Fei Wang1, Hua Su1, Yan Zhang1, Wei Zhao1, Zhi Yang1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Beijing 100142, China
  • Received:2018-03-31 Online:2018-04-15 Published:2018-04-15
  • Contact: Zhi Yang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Yang Zhi, Email:

Abstract:

Objective

To assess the predictive value of 18F-FDG PET/CT metabolic parameters in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs).

Methods

The preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging and surgical pathological data of 44 patients with GISTs treated at Beijing Cancer Hospital from November 2010 to December 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Clinicopathological parameters such as sex, age, lesion location, tumor diameter, lymph node metastasis, organ metastasis, mitotic figure, Ki-67 index, CD117 and CD34 expression, NIH risk classification, and WHO prognosis were analyzed by the Chi-square test in patients with positive and negative 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging results. In patients with positive 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging results, three PET/CT metabolic indexes (SUVmax, MTV, and TLG) were analyzed by the non-parametric rank sum test in different groups with different clinical or pathological features.

Results

Thirty-one cases had positive 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging results and 13 cases had negative results. The Chi-square test showed that there were significant differences between the two groups with regard to tumor diameter, mitotic figures, Ki-67 index, NIH risk classification, and WHO prognosis (χ2=13.926, P=0.003; χ2=7.738, P=0.021; χ2=4.233, P=0.040; χ2=24.670, P<0.001; χ2=24.670, P<0.001), but there was no significant difference in sex, age, lesion location, lymph node or organ metastasis, or expression of CD117 and CD34 (P>0.05 for all). Among the 31 18F-FDG PET/CT positive cases, MTV and TLG differed significantly between patients with tumor diameter≤5 cm and>5 cm (P=0.003 and 0.004, respectively), but the difference of SUVmax was not significant (P>0.05). SUVmax (P=0.022, 0.023, 0.016, 0.016), MTV (P=0.038, 0.028, 0.004, 0.004), and TLG (P=0.025, 0.014, 0.004, 0.004) differed significantly between patients with different mitotic figures (≤5/50 HPF vs >5/50 HPF), Ki-67 index (≤5% vs >5%), NIH risk classification, or WHO prognosis, while no significant difference was found between patients with different sexes, age (≤60 vs >60 years old), lesion site or density, CD34 expression (presence vs absence), lymph node or organ metastasis (presence vs absence) (P>0.05 for all). Pearson correlation analysis showed that SUVmax (P=0.020, 0.020, 0.014, 0.014), MTV (P=0.037, 0.026, 0.003, 0.003), and TLG (P=0.024, 0.012, 0.003, 0.003) were significantly correlated with pathological features including mitotic figure, Ki-67 index, NIH risk classification, and WHO prognosis. The areas under the ROC curves of the three metabolic parameters (SUVmax, MTV, and TLG) were 0.754, 0.801, and 0.801, respectively.

Conclusion

The metabolic parameters of 18F-FDG PET/CT have appreciated predictive value in grading the malignant risk of GISTs.

Key words: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography, Gastrointestinal stromal tumor, Malignant risk classification

京ICP 备07035254号-20
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 010-57830845 E-mail: zhlcyszz@cma.org.cn
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd