1 / 17

PET Scan Markers for Survival in Patients with Soft Tissue Sarcomas

PET Scan Markers for Survival in Patients with Soft Tissue Sarcomas. Joseph King, Eileen Crawford, Abass Alavi, Arthur Staddon, Lee Hartner, Richard Lackman and Christian Ogilvie. Background. Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are a heterogeneous group of malignant tumors

nellie
Download Presentation

PET Scan Markers for Survival in Patients with Soft Tissue Sarcomas

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PET Scan Markers for Survival in Patients with Soft Tissue Sarcomas Joseph King, Eileen Crawford, Abass Alavi, Arthur Staddon, Lee Hartner, Richard Lackman and Christian Ogilvie University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  2. Background • Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are a heterogeneous group of malignant tumors • Prognosis determined by CT, MRI, and biopsy • Problems/challenges: • Local extent, metastasis, recurrence • Diagnosis, grading, monitoring treatment response University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  3. Background • FDG uptake proportional to growth rate of neoplastic cells • PET SUVmax > 6 in sarcomas related to survival and progression1 • PET has shown promise in predicting survival for lung and breast carcinomas2-4 • Poor PET response to chemotherapy in STS (< 40% decline in FDG uptake) associated with increased rate of recurrence and death5 1) Eary et al 2002 2) Kramer et al. 2006 3) Chen et al. 2004 4) Schwartz et al. 2005 5) Sheutz et al. 2005 University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  4. Purpose • Determine predictors of survival based on FDG-PET imaging for patients with soft tissue sarcomas • SUVmax • Response to chemotherapy • PET active lung nodules University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  5. Hypothesis • Predictors for decreased survival will include: • High maximum standard uptake value (SUV) • FDG-enhancing lung nodules • Poor SUV-based response to chemotherapy University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  6. Materials and Methods • Study Design: Retrospective review • Study Group: • Treated with chemotherapy +/- resection • High or intermediate grade sarcoma • Primary tumor > 5 cm, or metastatic disease • PET scans done between 2003-2006 • 1st PET done before all disease resected • Minimum follow-up 6 months • 14 patients with pre- and post-chemo PET scans University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  7. Materials and Methods • Study Group: • 32 patients with STS • 14 excluded • Bone sarcoma • Also had carcinoma • No gross disease at time of initial scan • Inadequate documented follow up University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  8. Materials and Methods • Outcome Measures: 1. Maximum SUV (primary sarcoma or metastasis) 2. Number and location of PET detected metastatic lesions 3. SUV-based response to chemotherapy • Response: ≥ 40% decrease in SUV in over ½ of lesions • Stability: < 40% decrease in SUV in over ½ of lesions • Progression: SUV increase or new lesions University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  9. Diagnosis N Leiomyosarcoma 10 Synovial sarcoma 7 Liposarcoma 4 Malignant fibrous histiocytoma 4 Sarcoma NOS 2 Rhabdomyosarcoma 1 Myxofibrosarcoma 1 Atrial sarcoma 1 Desmoplastic round cell tumor 1 Extraosseous Ewing sarcoma 1 Mean age = 47 (range 20-74) 13 had mets on presentation 15 developed mets during f/u Patient Characteristics Location N Lower extremity 11 Pelvis 6 Chest 5 Abdomen 5 Upper extremity 4 Back 1 University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  10. Results • Mean follow-up = 49 months (range 7-172 months) • 10 alive at last f/u  6 with NED, 4 with metastatic disease • 5 patients had local recurrence after resection  mean time to LR was 2.4 years University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  11. p=0.76 University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  12. p=0.01 p=0.01 University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  13. p=0.001 University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  14. Conclusions • PET scan markers for decreased survival in patients with high grade STS include: • Presence of FDG-enchancing lung nodules • SUV-based disease progression during chemotherapy • SUVmax ≥ 6 was not a predictor for decreased survival University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  15. Discussion • Obtaining pre- and post-treatment PET scans to evaluate treatment response of localized or metastatic STS provides useful prognostic information • Maximum SUV was not found to have prognostic significance in this study • Lots of metastatic disease: selection bias with under representation of patients with lower histologic grade and better prognosis? University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  16. Future directions • Larger prospective studies of response to chemotherapy underway • Data on histologic subtypes • Liposarcoma: Brenner et al. 2006 • Rhabdomyosarcoma: Klem et al. 2007 • Probes other that glucose • Hypoxia • Apoptosis University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

  17. Thank You! University of Pennsylvania Department of Orthopaedic Surgery

More Related