Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 2019; 40(01): 21-27
DOI: 10.4103/ijmpo.ijmpo_253_17
Review Article

Role of pretreatment fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography quantitative parameters in prognostication of head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma

Narayana Subramaniam
Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
Deepak Balasubramanian
Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
P Shanmuga Sundaram
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita Vidya Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, Indias
,
Samskruthi Murthy
Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
Krishnakumar Thankappan
Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
,
Subramania Iyer
Department of Head and Neck Oncology, Amrita Institute of Medical Sciences, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kochi, Kerala, India
› Author Affiliations Financial support and sponsorship Nil.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

In spite of the good organ preservation strategies available for locally advanced head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), failure rates have been reported to be as high as 35%–50%. There has been an increasing interest in predicting response to treatment, to aid early intervention and better outcomes. Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is a standard modality for posttreatment evaluation; however, it is still underutilized as a pretreatment investigative modality. Several articles have described quantitative parameters in pretreatment FDG-PET to prognosticate patients and determine the likelihood of response to treatment; however, they are still not used commonly. This article was a review of the literature available on pretreatment FDG-PET quantitative parameters and their value in predicting failure. A thorough review of literature from MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed on pretreatment quantitative parameters in HNSCC. Metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were reliable parameters to predict response to organ preservation therapy, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Maximum SUV (SUVmax) was an inconsistent parameter. MTV and TLG may help predict poor response to organ preservation to initiate early surgical salvage or modify therapeutic decisions to optimize clinical outcomes. Routine use may provide additional information over SUVmax alone.

Keywords

Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography - fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography quantitative markers - head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma - organ preservation


Publication History

Article published online:
08 June 2021

© 2019. Indian Society of Medical and Paediatric Oncology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Calais G, Alfonsi M, Bardet E, Sire C, Germain T, Bergerot P. et al. Randomized trial of radiation therapy versus concomitant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91: 2081-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Argiris A, Karamouzis MV, Raben D, Ferris RL. Head and neck cancer. Lancet 2008; 371: 1695-709
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Vermorken JB, Remenar E, van Herpen C, Gorlia T, Mesia R, Degardin M. et al. Cisplatin, fluorouracil, and docetaxel in unresectable head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 1695-704
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Denis F, Garaud P, Bardet E, Alfonsi M, Sire C, Germain T. et al. Final results of the 94-01 French head and neck oncology and radiotherapy group randomized trial comparing radiotherapy alone with concomitant radiochemotherapy in advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 69-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Yao M, Smith RB, Graham MM, Hoffman HT, Tan H, Funk GF. et al. The role of FDG PET in management of neck metastasis from head-and-neck cancer after definitive radiation treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 63: 991-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Brun E, Kjellén E, Tennvall J, Ohlsson T, Sandell A, Perfekt R. et al. FDG PET studies during treatment: Prediction of therapy outcome in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck 2002; 24: 127-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bussink J, van Herpen CM, Kaanders JH, Oyen WJ. et al. PET-CT for response assessment and treatment adaptation in head and neck cancer. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 661-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Worden FP, Moyer J, Lee JS, Taylor JM, Urba SG, Eisbruch A. et al. Chemoselection as a strategy for organ preservation in patients with T4 laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma with cartilage invasion. Laryngoscope 2009; 119: 1510-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Knab BR, Salama JK, Solanki A, Stenson KM, Cohen EE, Witt ME. et al. Functional organ preservation with definitive chemoradiotherapy for T4 laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2008; 19: 1650-4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Wolf GT. Routine computed tomography scanning for tumor staging in advanced laryngeal cancer: Implications for treatment selection. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 2315-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Castelijns JA, van den Brekel MW, Tobi H, Smit EM, Golding RP, van SchaikC. et al. Laryngeal carcinoma after radiation therapy: Correlation of abnormal MR imaging signal patterns in laryngeal cartilage with the risk of recurrence. Radiology 1996; 198: 151-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Becker M, Zbären P, Casselman JW, Kohler R, Dulguerov P, Becker CD. et al. Neoplastic invasion of laryngeal cartilage: Reassessment of criteria for diagnosis at MR imaging. Radiology 2008; 249: 551-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH. et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 480-508
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Flier JS, Mueckler MM, Usher P, Lodish HF. et al. Elevated levels of glucose transport and transporter messenger RNA are induced by ras or src oncogenes. Science 1987; 235: 1492-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Mathupala SP, Rempel A, Pedersen PL. Glucose catabolism in cancer cells. Isolation, sequence, and activity of the promoter for type II hexokinase. J Biol Chem 1995; 270: 16918-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Chung MK, Jeong HS, Park SG, Jang JY, Son YT, Choi JY. et al. Metabolic tumor volume of [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography predicts short-term outcome to radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in pharyngeal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15: 5861-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Seol YM, Kwon BR, Song MK, Choi YJ, Shin HJ, Chung JS. et al. Measurement of tumor volume by PET to evaluate prognosis in patients with head and neck cancer treated by chemo-radiation therapy. Acta Oncol 2010; 49: 201-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Allal AS, Dulguerov P, Allaoua M, Haenggeli CA, El-Ghazi elA, Lehmann W. et al. Standardized uptake value of 2-[(18)F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in predicting outcome in head and neck carcinomas treated by radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2002; 20: 1398-404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gupta T, Master Z, Kannan S, Agarwal JP, Ghsoh-Laskar S, Rangarajan V. et al. Diagnostic performance of post-treatment FDG PET or FDG PET/CT imaging in head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 2083-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Brkovich VS, Miller FR, Karnad AB, Hussey DH, McGuff HS, Otto RA. et al. The role of positron emission tomography scans in the management of the N-positive neck in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma after chemoradiotherapy. Laryngoscope 2006; 116: 855-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Goguen LA, Posner MR, Tishler RB, Wirth LJ, Norris CM, Annino DJ. et al. Examining the need for neck dissection in the era of chemoradiation therapy for advanced head and neck cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006; 132: 526-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Yao M, Luo P, Hoffman HT, Chang K, Graham MM, Menda Y. et al. Pathology and FDG PET correlation of residual lymph nodes in head and neck cancer after radiation treatment. Am J Clin Oncol 2007; 30: 264-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ryan WR, Fee WEJr, Le QT, Pinto HA. et al. Neonatal. Neonat 2013; 2: 4-7
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Terhaard CH, Bongers V, van Rijk PP, Hordijk GJ. F-18-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron-emission tomography scanning in detection of local recurrence after radiotherapy for laryngeal/pharyngeal cancer. Head Neck 2014; 23: 933-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Fogarty GB, Peters LJ, Stewart J, Scott C, Rischin D, Hicks RJ. et al. The usefulness of fluorine 18-labelled deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the investigation of patients with cervical lymphadenopathy from an unknown primary tumor. Head Neck 2003; 25: 138-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Martinelli M, Townsend D, Meltzer C, Villemagne VV, Deshpande VP. Survey of results of whole body imaging using the PET/CT at the University of Pittsburgh medical center PET facility. Clin Positron Imaging 2000; 3: 161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kitagawa Y, Nishizawa S, Sano K, Ogasawara T, Nakamura M, Sadato N. et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-FDG PET with conventional imaging modalities (MRI, CT, and 67Ga scintigraphy) in assessment of combined intraarterial chemotherapy and radiotherapy for head and neck carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 198-206
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging of cancer with positron emission tomography. Nat Rev Cancer 2002; 2: 683-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Suzuki H, Hasegawa Y, Terada A, Hyodo I, Nakashima T, Nishio M. et al. FDG-PET predicts survival and distant metastasis in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2009; 45: 569-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Schwartz DL, Rajendran J, Yueh B, Coltrera MD, Leblanc M, Eary J. et al. FDG-PET prediction of head and neck squamous cell cancer outcomes. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004; 130: 1361-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Torizuka T, Tanizaki Y, Kanno T, Futatsubashi M, Naitou K, Ueda Y. et al. Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET in patients with head and neck squamous cell cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009; 192: W156-60
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Castaldi P, Rufini V, Bussu F, Miccichè F, Dinapoli N, Autorino R. et al. Can “early” and “late”18F-FDG PET-CT be used as prognostic factors for the clinical outcome of patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer treated with radio-chemotherapy?. Radiother Oncol 2012; 103: 63-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hentschel M, Appold S, Schreiber A, Abolmaali N, Abramyuk A, Dörr W. et al. Early FDG PET at 10 or 20 Gy under chemoradiotherapy is prognostic for locoregional control and overall survival in patients with head and neck cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 1203-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Adams MC, Turkington TG, Wilson JM, Wong TZ. A systematic review of the factors affecting accuracy of SUV measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 195: 310-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Higgins KA, Hoang JK, Roach MC, Chino J, Yoo DS, Turkington TG. et al. Analysis of pretreatment FDG-PET SUV parameters in head-and-neck cancer: Tumor SUVmean has superior prognostic value. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 82: 548-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Schinagl DA, Span PN, Oyen WJ, Kaanders JH. Can FDG PET predict radiation treatment outcome in head and neck cancer? Results of a prospective study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 1449-58
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Allal AS, Slosman DO, Kebdani T, Allaoua M, Lehmann W, Dulguerov P. et al. Prediction of outcome in head-and-neck cancer patients using the standardized uptake value of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59: 1295-300
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Halfpenny W, Hain SF, Biassoni L, Maisey MN, Sherman JA, McGurk M. et al. FDG-PET. A possible prognostic factor in head and neck cancer. Br J Cancer 2002; 86: 512-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Lee SW, Nam SY, Im KC, Kim JS, Choi EK, Ahn SD. et al. Prediction of prognosis using standardized uptake value of 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography for nasopharyngeal carcinomas. Radiother Oncol 2008; 87: 221-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Machtay M, Natwa M, Andrel J, Hyslop T, Anne PR, Lavarino J. et al. Pretreatment FDG-PET standardized uptake value as a prognostic factor for outcome in head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2009; 31: 195-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Minn H, Lapela M, Klemi PJ, Grénman R, Leskinen S, Lindholm P. et al. Prediction of survival with fluorine-18-fluoro-deoxyglucose and PET in head and neck cancer. J Nucl Med 1997; 38: 1907-11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Roh JL, Pae KH, Choi SH, Kim JS, Lee S, Kim SB. et al. 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography as guidance for primary treatment in patients with advanced-stage resectable squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx and hypopharynx. Eur J Surg Oncol 2007; 33: 790-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 La TH, Filion EJ, Turnbull BB, Chu JN, Lee P, Nguyen K. et al. Metabolic tumor volume predicts for recurrence and death in head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 74: 1335-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Soto DE, Kessler ML, Piert M, Eisbruch A. Correlation between pretreatment FDG-PET biological target volume and anatomical location of failure after radiation therapy for head and neck cancers. Radiother Oncol 2008; 89: 13-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Suzuki K, Nishioka T, Homma A, Tsuchiya K, Yasuda M, Aoyama H. et al. Value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography before radiotherapy for head and neck cancer: Does the standardized uptake value predict treatment outcome?. Jpn J Radiol 2009; 27: 237-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Thorwarth D, Eschmann SM, Holzner F, Paulsen F, Alber M. Combined uptake of [18F] FDG and [18F] FMISO correlates with radiation therapy outcome in head-and-neck cancer patients. Radiother Oncol 2006; 80: 151-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Vernon MR, Maheshwari M, Schultz CJ, Michel MA, Wong SJ, Campbell BH. et al. Clinical outcomes of patients receiving integrated PET/CT-guided radiotherapy for head and neck carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 70: 678-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Knegjens JL, Hauptmann M, Pameijer FA, Balm AJ, Hoebers FJ, de Bois JA. et al. Tumor volume as prognostic factor in chemoradiation for advanced head and neck cancer. Head & neck 2011; 33: 375-82
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Chung MK, Jeong HS, Park JY, Jang JY, Son YI, Choi JY. et al. Metabolic tumor volume of [18 F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography predicts short-term outcome to radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy in pharyngeal cancer. Clinical cancer research 2009; 15: 5861-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Murphy JD, La TH, Chu K, Quon A, Fischbein NJ, Maxim PG. et al. Postradiation metabolic tumor volume predicts outcome in head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 80: 514-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Park GC, Kim JS, Roh JL, Choi SH, Nam SY, Kim SY. et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume measured by 18F-FDG PET/CT in advanced-stage squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx and hypopharynx. Ann Oncol 2013; 24: 208-14
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Tang C, Murphy JD, La B, La TH, Khong C, Fischbein NJ. et al. Validation that metabolic tumor volume predicts outcome in head-and-neck cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 83: 1514-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Choi KH, Yoo IR, Han EJ, Kim YS, Kim GW, Na SJ. et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume measured by 18 F-FDG PET/CT in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinomas treated by surgery. Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging 2011; 45: 43-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Romesser PB, Qureshi MM, Shah BA, Chatburn LT, Jalisi S, Devaiah AK. et al. Superior prognostic utility of gross and metabolic tumor volume compared to standardized uptake value using PET/CT in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Ann Nucl Med 2012; 26: 527-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Sinha S, Abd El-Hafez YG, Moustafa HM, Khalil HF, Liao CT, Yen TC. Total lesion glycolysis: A possible new prognostic parameter in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2013; 49: 261-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Lim R, Eaton A, Lee NY, Setton J, Ohri N, Rao S. et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis predict outcome in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 1506-13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Hanamoto A, Tatsumi M, Takenaka Y, Hamasaki T, Yasui T, Nakahara S. et al. Volumetric PET/CT parameters predict local response of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma to chemoradiotherapy. Cancer Med 2014; 3: 1368-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Pak K, Cheon GJ, Nam HY, Kim SJ, Kang KW, Chung JK. et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis in head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Nucl Med 2014; 55: 884-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Xie P, Li M, Zhao H, Sun X, Fu Z, Yu J. 18F-FDG PET or PET-CT to evaluate prognosis for head and neck cancer: A meta-analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2011; 137: 1085-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Gupta T, Master Z, Kannan S, Agarwal JP, Ghsoh-Laskar S, Rangarajan V. et al. Diagnostic performance of post-treatment FDG PET or FDG PET/CT imaging in head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 2083-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Rasmussen GB, Vogelius IR, Rasmussen JH, Schumaker L, Ioffe O, Cullen K. et al. Immunohistochemical biomarkers and FDG uptake on PET/CT in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Acta Oncol 2015; 54: 1408-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Han MW, Lee HJ, Cho KJ, Kim JS, Choi SH. et al. Role of FDG-PET as a biological marker for predicting the hypoxic status of tongue cancer. Head Neck 2012; 34: 1395-402
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar