Second-look PET-CT following an initial incomplete PET-CT response to (chemo)radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Chemoradiotherapy
Female
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
Head and Neck Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Humans
Lymph Nodes
/ pathology
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography
Retrospective Studies
Sensitivity and Specificity
Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck
/ diagnostic imaging
Chemotherapy
Head and neck cancer
PET-CT
Radiotherapy
Recurrence
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
18
05
2019
accepted:
26
07
2019
revised:
03
07
2019
pubmed:
6
9
2019
medline:
5
6
2020
entrez:
6
9
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The limited positive predictive value of an incomplete response on PET-CT following (chemo)radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) means that the optimal management strategy remains uncertain. The aim of the study is to assess the utility of a 'second-look' interval PET-CT. Patients with HNSCC who were treated with (chemo)radiotherapy between 2008 and 2017 and underwent (i) baseline and (ii) response assessment PET-CT and (iii) second-look PET-CT following incomplete (positive or equivocal scan) response were included. Endpoints were conversion rate to complete response (CR) and test characteristics of the second-look PET-CT. Five hundred sixty-two patients with HNSCC underwent response assessment PET-CT at a median of 17 weeks post-radiotherapy. Following an incomplete response on PET-CT, 40 patients underwent a second-look PET-CT at a median of 13 weeks (range 6-25) from the first response PET-CT. Thirty-four out of 40 (85%) patients had oropharyngeal carcinoma. Twenty-four out of 40 (60%) second-look PET-CT scans converted to a complete locoregional response. The primary tumour conversion rate was 15/27 (56%) and the lymph node conversion rate was 14/19 (74%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV) of the second-look PET-CT were 75%, 75%, 25% and 96% for the primary tumour and 100%, 92%, 40% and 100% for lymph nodes. There were no cases of progression following conversion to CR in the primary site or lymph nodes. The majority of patients who undergo a second-look PET-CT convert to a CR. The NPV of a second-look PET-CT is high, suggesting the potential to avoid surgical intervention. • PET-CT is a useful tool for response assessment following (chemo)radiotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. • An incomplete response on PET-CT has a limited positive predictive value and optimal management is uncertain. • These data show that with a 'second-look' interval PET-CT, the majority of patients convert to a complete metabolic response. When there is doubt about clinical and radiological response, a 'second-look' PET-CT can be used to spare patients unnecessary surgical intervention.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31485835
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06401-7
pii: 10.1007/s00330-019-06401-7
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
0Z5B2CJX4D
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1212-1220Références
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2017 Nov;29(11):753-759
pubmed: 28780008
Radiat Oncol. 2011 May 24;6:54
pubmed: 21609453
N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 14;374(15):1444-54
pubmed: 27007578
Clin Radiol. 2016 Jul;71(7):e171-88
pubmed: 27207376
J Nucl Med. 2009 May;50 Suppl 1:122S-50S
pubmed: 19403881
Head Neck. 2010 Feb;32(2):253-61
pubmed: 19572281
Oral Oncol. 2018 Mar;78:108-113
pubmed: 29496037
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Apr;43(4):605-8
pubmed: 26732470
J Laryngol Otol. 2016 May;130(S2):S90-S96
pubmed: 27841123
J Am Coll Radiol. 2016 Jun;13(6):743-746.e1
pubmed: 26577876
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2019 Apr;31(4):212-218
pubmed: 30553580
Clin Med Insights Oncol. 2017 Jun 14;11:1179554917713005
pubmed: 28659717
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015 Feb;42(2):328-54
pubmed: 25452219
Swiss Med Wkly. 2015 Feb 21;145:w14116
pubmed: 25701645
J Laryngol Otol. 2016 May;130(S2):S75-S82
pubmed: 27841116
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011 Nov;38(11):2083-95
pubmed: 21853309
J Nucl Med. 2014 Sep;55(9):1411-6
pubmed: 24947059
Head Neck. 2011 Dec;33(12):1675-82
pubmed: 22076976
N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 4;375(5):491-2
pubmed: 27518681
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016 Jul;43(7):1239-47
pubmed: 26707387
Oral Oncol. 2014 Mar;50(3):234-9
pubmed: 24387978
Oral Oncol. 2019 Jan;88:153-159
pubmed: 30616786
Br J Radiol. 2015 Aug;88(1052):20140592
pubmed: 26081447
Head Neck. 2016 Apr;38 Suppl 1:E853-8
pubmed: 25917499
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014 Oct;26(10):636-42
pubmed: 24928558
Head Neck. 2016 Apr;38 Suppl 1:E473-9
pubmed: 25716933