Different roles of surveillance positron emission tomography according to the histologic subtype of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background/Aims: Although the use of surveillance 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is discouraged in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, its usefulness in different subtypes has not been thoroughly investigated. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 157 patients who showed positive results on surveillance FDG-PET/CT every 6 months following complete response for up to 5 years. All of the patients also underwent biopsies. Results: Seventy-eight (49.6%) of 157 patients had true positive results; the remaining 79 (50.3%), including eight (5.1%) with secondary malignancies, were confirmed to yield false positive results. Among the 78 patients with true positive results, the disease in seven (8.9%) had transformed to a different subtype. The positive predictive value (PPV) of FDG-PET/CT for aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) was lower than that for indolent B-cell or aggressive T-cell NHL (p = 0.003 and p = 0.018, respectively), especially in patients with a low/low-intermediate international prognostic index (IPI) upon a positive PET/CT finding. On the other hand, indolent B-cell and aggressive T-cell NHL patients showed PPVs of > 60%, including those with low/low-intermediate secondary IPIs. Conclusions: The role of FDG-PET/CT surveillance is limited, and differs according to the lymphoma subtype. FDG-PET/CT may be useful in detecting early relapse in patients with aggressive T-cell NHL, including those with low/low-intermediate risk secondary IPI; as already known, FDG-PET/CT has no role in aggressive B-cell NHL. Repeat biopsy should be performed to discriminate relapse or transformation from false positive findings in patients with positive surveillance FDG-PET/CT results.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Although the use of surveillance 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) is discouraged in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, its usefulness in different subtypes has not been thoroughly investigated. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 157 patients who showed positive results on surveillance FDG-PET/CT every 6 months following complete response for up to 5 years. All of the patients also underwent biopsies. Results: Seventy-eight (49.6%) of 157 patients had true positive results; the remaining 79 (50.3%), including eight (5.1%) with secondary malignancies, were confirmed to yield false positive results. Among the 78 patients with true positive results, the disease in seven (8.9%) had transformed to a different subtype. The positive predictive value (PPV) of FDG-PET/CT for aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) was lower than that for indolent B-cell or aggressive T-cell NHL (p = 0.003 and p = 0.018, respectively), especially in patients with a low/low-intermediate international prognostic index (IPI) upon a positive PET/CT finding. On the other hand, indolent B-cell and aggressive T-cell NHL patients showed PPVs of > 60%, including those with low/low-intermediate secondary IPIs. Conclusions: The role of FDG-PET/CT surveillance is limited, and differs according to the lymphoma subtype. FDG-PET/CT may be useful in detecting early relapse in patients with aggressive T-cell NHL, including those with low/low-intermediate risk secondary IPI; as already known, FDG-PET/CT has no role in aggressive B-cell NHL. Repeat biopsy should be performed to discriminate relapse or transformation from false positive findings in patients with positive surveillance FDG-PET/CT results.
참고문헌 (24)
- Ansell SM, "Positron emission tomographic scans in lymphoma: convention and controversy", Mayo Clin Proc, 87, pp.571~580 (2012)
- Cheson BD, "Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma", J Clin Oncol, 25, pp.579~586 (2007)
- Yang DH, "Prognostic significance of interim 18F-FDG PET", CT after three or four cycles of R-CHOP chemotherapy in the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 2011, pp.47, 1312~1318
- Gallamini A, "Interim FDG-PET in Hodgkin lymphoma: a compass for a safe navigation in clinical trials?", Blood, 120, pp.4913~4920 (2012)
- Cheson BD, "Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma : the Lugano classification", J Clin Oncol, 32, pp.3059~3068 (2014)
- Lee AI, "Surveillance imaging of Hodgkin lymphoma patients in first remission : a clinical and economic analysis", Cancer, 116, pp.3835~3842 (2010)
- El-Galaly TC, "Routine imaging for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in first complete remission does not improve post-treatment survival : a Danish-Swedish population-based study", J Clin Oncol, 33, pp.3993~3998 (2015)
- Jakobsen LH, "No survival benefit associated with routine surveillance imaging for Hodgkin lymphoma in first remission : a Danish-Swedish population-based observational study", Br J Haematol, 173, pp.236~244 (2016)
- Huang B, "Whole-body PET", CT scanning : estimation of radiation dose and cancer risk, 2009, pp.251, 166~174
- Barrington SF, "When should FDG-PET be used in the modern management of lymphoma?", Br J Haematol, 164, pp.315~328 (2014)
- Castellucci P, "Potential pitfalls of 18F-FDG PET in a large series of patients treated for malignant lymphoma : prevalence and scan interpretation", Nucl Med Commun, 26, pp.689~694 (2005)
- Petrausch U, "Risk-adapted FDG-PET", CT-based follow-up in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after first-line therapy, 2010, pp.21, 1694~1698
- Cheah CY, "Limited role for surveillance PET-CT scanning in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in complete metabolic remission following primary therapy", Br J Cancer, 109, pp.312~317 (2013)
- Hamlin PA, "Age-adjusted international prognostic index predicts autologous stem cell transplantation outcome for patients with relapsed or primary refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma", Blood, 102, pp.1989~1996 (2003)
- Swerdlow SH, "The 2016 revision of the World Health Organization classification of lymphoid neoplasms", Blood, 127, pp.2375~2390 (2016)
- Lister TA, "Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin’s disease : Cotswolds meeting", J Clin Oncol, 7, pp.1630~1636 (1989)
- International Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Prognostic Factors Project, "A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma", N Engl J Med, 329, pp.987~994 (1993)
- Stansfeld AG, "Updated Kiel classification for lymphomas", Lancet, 1, pp.292~293 (1988)
- Tilly H, "Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up", Ann Oncol, 26(Suppl 5), pp.v116~v125 (2015)
- fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the follow-up of lymphoma, "J Clin Oncol", 2009, 1781~1787
- Mikhaeel NG, "18-FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in the treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma-comparison with CT", Leuk Lymphoma, 39, pp.543~553 (2000)
- Meignan M, "Report on the first international workshop on interim-PET-scan in lymphoma", Leuk Lymphoma, 50, pp.1257~1260 (2009)
- Avivi I, "Strikingly high false positivity of surveillance FDG-PET", CT scanning among patients with diffuse large cell lymphoma in the rituximab era, 2013, pp.88, 400~405
- Han HS, "High incidence of false-positive PET scans in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma treated with rituximab-containing regimens", Ann Oncol, 20, pp.309~318 (2009)