4.6 Article

[18F]FDG Positron Emission Tomography within Two Weeks of Starting Erlotinib Therapy Can Predict Response in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087629

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate whether [F-18]FDG-PET/CT, performed within two weeks of starting erlotinib therapy can predict tumor response defined by RECIST 1.1 criteria after 8 weeks of treatment in patients with inoperable (stage IIIA to IV) non-small cell lung cancer patients. Patients and Methods: Three [18 F] FDG-PET/CT scans were acquired in 12 patients before (5 +/- 4 days) and after 9 +/- 3 days (early PET) and 60 +/- 6 days (late PET) of erlotinib therapy. Conventional evaluation, including at least chest CT (baseline versus after 8 weeks of treatment), was performed according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. Change in [F-18]FDG uptake was compared with conventional response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: By using ROC analysis, the Area Under the Curve for prediction of metabolic non-progressive disease (mNP) by early PET was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.62 to 1.1; P = 0.04) at a cut-off of 21.6% reduction in maximum Standardized Uptake Value (SUVmax). This correctly classified 11/12 patients (7 with true progressive disease; 4 with true non-progressive disease; 1 with false progressive disease). Non-progressive disease after 8 weeks of treatment according to RECIST 1.1 criteria was significantly more frequent in patients classified mNP (P = 0.01, Fisher's exact test). mNP patients showed prolonged PFS (HR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.59; P<0.01) and OS (HR = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.84; P = 0.03). Late PET analysis provided concordant results. Conclusion: Morphologic response, PFS and OS survival in non-small cell lung cancer patients can be predicted by [F-18]FDG-PET/CT scan within 2 weeks after starting erlotinib therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available