4.5 Article

Changes in treatment intent and target definition for preoperative radiotherapy after 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in rectal cancer: A Meta-analysis

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
Volume 145, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110061

Keywords

Rectal cancer; Radiotherapy planning; Fluorodeoxyglucose; Positron emission tomography; Treatment plan

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korea government (MSIT) [2021R1G1A1009606, K2023081]
  2. Korea University, Republic of Korea
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2021R1G1A1009606] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

FDG PET influenced treatment planning for patients with rectal cancer, changing treatment intent or target definition for some patients. While PET-based PTV did not significantly change, it provided additional information for accurate tumor delineation.
Purpose: To evaluate the impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) on changes in treatment plan and target definition for preoperative radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer. Methods: Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library were searched up to November 2020 for all studies investigating the role of preoperative FDG PET in patients who underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy before curativeintent surgery. The proportion of patients whose treatment plan (curative vs. palliative intent) or target definition was changed after FDG PET was analyzed. A random-effects model was used for pooled analysis. The change in target definition was compared between conventional radiological imaging-based target volume [gross tumor volume (GTV) or planning target volume (PTV)] and PET-based target volume (GTV or PTV) using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: A total of 336 patients from twelve studies were included. In eight studies, PET changed either the treatment intent or target definition in 24.8% of patients (95% CI 15.1% to 37.9%, I2 = 69%). In ten studies, the PET-based GTV was lower than the conventional imaging-based target volume (SMD -7.0, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.01). However, there was no significant difference between conventional imaging-based and PET-based PTV (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.62). In six studies evaluating the initial staging based on PET, the initial staging (nodal or metastasis status) was changed in 53 of 229 patients (23.1%). Newly detected or additional distant metastases were identified in 22 patients (9.6%) after FDG PET. Conclusion: The use of FDG PET influences radiotherapy planning in a fourth of patients with rectal cancer. FDG PET can provide additive information for accurate tumor delineation, although PET-based PTV did not significantly change. These findings suggest that FDG PET may be beneficial to patients with rectal cancer before establishing a radiotherapy plan.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available