Are Pretreatment 18F-FDG PET Tumor Textural Features in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Associated with Response and Survival After Chemoradiotherapy?

There is evidence in some solid tumors that textural features of tumoral uptake in 18F-FDG PET images are associated with response to chemoradiotherapy and survival. We have investigated whether a similar relationship exists in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Fifty-three patients (mean age, 65.8 y; 31 men, 22 women) with NSCLC treated with chemoradiotherapy underwent pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT scans. Response was assessed by CT Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) at 12 wk. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and local PFS (LPFS) were recorded. Primary tumor texture was measured by the parameters coarseness, contrast, busyness, and complexity. The following parameters were also derived from the PET data: primary tumor standardized uptake values (SUVs) (mean SUV, maximum SUV, and peak SUV), metabolic tumor volume, and total lesion glycolysis. Results: Compared with nonresponders, RECIST responders showed lower coarseness (mean, 0.012 vs. 0.027; P = 0.004) and higher contrast (mean, 0.11 vs. 0.044; P = 0.002) and busyness (mean, 0.76 vs. 0.37; P = 0.027). Neither complexity nor any of the SUV parameters predicted RECIST response. By Kaplan–Meier analysis, OS, PFS, and LPFS were lower in patients with high primary tumor coarseness (median, 21.1 mo vs. not reached, P = 0.003; 12.6 vs. 25.8 mo, P = 0.002; and 12.9 vs. 20.5 mo, P = 0.016, respectively). Tumor coarseness was an independent predictor of OS on multivariable analysis. Contrast and busyness did not show significant associations with OS (P = 0.075 and 0.059, respectively), but PFS and LPFS were longer in patients with high levels of each (for contrast: median of 20.5 vs. 12.6 mo, P = 0.015, and median not reached vs. 24 mo, P = 0.02; and for busyness: median of 20.5 vs. 12.6 mo, P = 0.01, and median not reached vs. 24 mo, P = 0.006). Neither complexity nor any of the SUV parameters showed significant associations with the survival parameters. Conclusion: In NSCLC, baseline 18F-FDG PET scan uptake showing abnormal texture as measured by coarseness, contrast, and busyness is associated with nonresponse to chemoradiotherapy by RECIST and with poorer prognosis. Measurement of tumor metabolic heterogeneity with these parameters may provide indices that can be used to stratify patients in clinical trials for lung cancer chemoradiotherapy.

[1]  Y. Bang,et al.  High Fluorodeoxyglucose Uptake on Positron Emission Tomography in Patients with Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer on Platinum-Based Combination Chemotherapy , 2006, Clinical Cancer Research.

[2]  J. Crowley,et al.  The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for the Revision of the TNM Stage Groupings in the Forthcoming (Seventh) Edition of the TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours , 2007, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[3]  R. Wahl,et al.  From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[4]  M. Hatt,et al.  Intratumor Heterogeneity Characterized by Textural Features on Baseline 18F-FDG PET Images Predicts Response to Concomitant Radiochemotherapy in Esophageal Cancer , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[5]  M. Hatt,et al.  Reproducibility of Tumor Uptake Heterogeneity Characterization Through Textural Feature Analysis in 18F-FDG PET , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[6]  J. Yue,et al.  Prognostic value of serial [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT uptake in stage III patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated by concurrent chemoradiotherapy. , 2011, European journal of radiology.

[7]  J. Matthews,et al.  Metabolic (FDG-PET) response after radical radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer correlates with patterns of failure. , 2005, Lung cancer.

[8]  Hyae-Young Kim,et al.  Early Prediction of Response to First-Line Therapy Using Integrated 18F-FDG PET/CT for Patients with Advanced/Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer , 2009, Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer.

[9]  Robert King,et al.  Textural features corresponding to textural properties , 1989, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[10]  Balaji Ganeshan,et al.  Texture analysis of non-small cell lung cancer on unenhanced computed tomography: initial evidence for a relationship with tumour glucose metabolism and stage , 2010, Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society.

[11]  Y. Ohno,et al.  Diffusion-weighted MRI versus 18F-FDG PET/CT: performance as predictors of tumor treatment response and patient survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving chemoradiotherapy. , 2012, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  L. Trani,et al.  A phase II study of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET-CT in non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving erlotinib (Tarceva); objective and symptomatic responses at 6 and 12 weeks. , 2012, European journal of cancer.

[13]  M. Hasegawa,et al.  Phantom study on radiotherapy planning using PET/CT--delineation of GTV by evaluating SUV. , 2010, Journal of radiation research.

[14]  K. Miles,et al.  Tumour heterogeneity in non-small cell lung carcinoma assessed by CT texture analysis: a potential marker of survival , 2012, European Radiology.

[15]  V. Goh,et al.  Assessment of response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors in metastatic renal cell cancer: CT texture as a predictive biomarker. , 2011, Radiology.

[16]  F. O’Sullivan,et al.  Spatial Heterogeneity in Sarcoma 18F-FDG Uptake as a Predictor of Patient Outcome , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[17]  Issam El-Naqa,et al.  Exploring feature-based approaches in PET images for predicting cancer treatment outcomes , 2009, Pattern Recognit..

[18]  W. Oyen,et al.  Chemotherapy Response Evaluation with 18F-FDG PET in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer , 2007, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[19]  K. Shiraishi,et al.  Repeat FDG-PET for predicting pathological tumor response and prognosis after neoadjuvant treatment in nonsmall cell lung cancer: comparison with computed tomography. , 2010, Annals of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery : official journal of the Association of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons of Asia.

[20]  Shoji Kido,et al.  Fractal Analysis of Internal and Peripheral Textures of Small Peripheral Bronchogenic Carcinomas in Thin-section Computed Tomography: Comparison of Bronchioloalveolar Cell Carcinomas With Nonbronchioloalveolar Cell Carcinomas , 2003, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[21]  Sang-We Kim,et al.  FDG-PET as a Potential Tool for Selecting Patients with Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Who May Be Spared Maintenance Therapy after First-Line Chemotherapy , 2011, Clinical Cancer Research.

[22]  H. Groen,et al.  18F-FDG PET during stereotactic body radiotherapy for stage I lung tumours cannot predict outcome: a pilot study , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[23]  Baosheng Li,et al.  Standard uptake value and metabolic tumor volume of 18F-FDG PET/CT predict short-term outcome early in the course of chemoradiotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[24]  S. Jakobsen,et al.  PET imaging of patients with non-small cell lung cancer employing an EGF receptor targeting drug as tracer , 2011, British Journal of Cancer.

[25]  Huan Yu,et al.  Coregistered FDG PET/CT-Based Textural Characterization of Head and Neck Cancer for Radiation Treatment Planning , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[26]  C. Ramos‐Font,et al.  Is FDG‐PET suitable for evaluating neoadjuvant therapy in non‐small cell lung cancer? Evidence with systematic review of the literature , 2010, Journal of surgical oncology.

[27]  Joos V Lebesque,et al.  Standardised FDG uptake: a prognostic factor for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer. , 2005, European journal of cancer.

[28]  K. Miles,et al.  Tumour heterogeneity in oesophageal cancer assessed by CT texture analysis: preliminary evidence of an association with tumour metabolism, stage, and survival. , 2012, Clinical radiology.

[29]  I. Poon,et al.  Automated radiation targeting in head-and-neck cancer using region-based texture analysis of PET and CT images. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[30]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  Evaluation of a cumulative SUV-volume histogram method for parameterizing heterogeneous intratumoural FDG uptake in non-small cell lung cancer PET studies , 2011, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[31]  Omar S. Al-Kadi,et al.  Texture Analysis of Aggressive and Nonaggressive Lung Tumor CE CT Images , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[32]  C. Dooms,et al.  Prognostic stratification of stage IIIA-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer after induction chemotherapy: a model based on the combination of morphometric-pathologic response in mediastinal nodes and primary tumor response on serial 18-fluoro-2-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[33]  J. Bradley,et al.  Combined PET/CT image characteristics for radiotherapy tumor response in lung cancer. , 2012, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.