Comparison of therapeutic evaluation criteria in FDG-PET/CT in patients with diffuse large-cell B-cell lymphoma: Prognostic impact of tumor/liver ratio

Purpose The study objective was to compare the prognostic value of interim and end-of-treatment FDG PET/CT using five therapeutic evaluation criteria in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods 181 patients were retrospectively analysed. All patients underwent FDG-PET at baseline and after four cycles (iPET4) of first-line chemotherapy and 165 at the end-of-treatment (PET-eot). Ratio Deauville score (rDS) (SUVmax-target residual lesion/SUVmax-liver) was measured in iPET4 and PET-eot, and its optimal threshold was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Deauville score (DS) (iPET4 and PET-eot), ΔSUVmax, ΔSUVmax determined according to Menton 2011 criteria (ΔSUVmax+DS) and ΔSUVmax+rDS were also evaluated (iPET4 only). Median follow-up was 44 months. Results ROC analysis revealed the optimal cut-off value was 1.4-fold of SUVmax-liver on iPET4 and PET-eot. On iPET4, positive predictive value (PPV) of rDS was significantly better than DS: 81.58% vs. 67.79%. In univariate analysis, the five interpretation methods were statistically significant (p<0.0001 for progression-free survival [PFS] and overall survival [OS]). In multivariate analysis, only rDS was an independent prognostic factor (p = 0.0002 and p<0.0001 for PFS and OS, respectively). On PET-eot, similarly, the two therapeutic evaluation criteria analysed (rDS and DS) were statistically significant at the univariate level (p<0.0001). rDS was the only significant prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (p<0.0001). PPV and accuracy of rDS were also better than DS. Conclusions rDS with a tumor/liver ratio of 1.4 is a robust prognostic factor in patients with DLBCL on iPET4 and PET-eot.

[1]  W. Klapper,et al.  Six versus eight doses of rituximab in patients with aggressive B cell lymphoma receiving six cycles of CHOP: results from the “Positron Emission Tomography-Guided Therapy of Aggressive Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas” (PETAL) trial , 2019, Annals of Hematology.

[2]  Jun Zhu,et al.  Can the SUVmax-liver-based interpretation improve prognostic accuracy of interim and posttreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma? , 2018, Leukemia & lymphoma.

[3]  S. Hohaus,et al.  FDG-PET/CT at the end of immuno-chemotherapy in follicular lymphoma: the prognostic role of the ratio between target lesion and liver SUVmax (rPET) , 2018, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.

[4]  J. Jais,et al.  FDG-PET-driven consolidation strategy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: final results of a randomized phase 2 study. , 2017, Blood.

[5]  R. Casasnovas,et al.  Interim PET-driven strategy in de novo diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: do we trust the driver? , 2017, Blood.

[6]  Jun Zhu,et al.  Evaluating early interim fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography with the SUVmax-liver-based interpretation for predicting the outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma , 2017, Leukemia & lymphoma.

[7]  J. Ensor,et al.  Leukapheresis reduces 4-week mortality in acute myeloid leukemia patients with hyperleukocytosis – a retrospective study from a tertiary center , 2017, Leukemia & lymphoma.

[8]  S. Hohaus,et al.  Interim FDG-PET/CT in Hodgkin lymphoma: the prognostic role of the ratio between target lesion and liver SUVmax (rPET) , 2016, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.

[9]  P. Gaulard,et al.  Prognostic value of baseline total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV0) measured on FDG-PET/CT in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). , 2016, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[10]  C. Mamot,et al.  Final Results of a Prospective Evaluation of the Predictive Value of Interim Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Treated With R-CHOP-14 (SAKK 38/07). , 2015, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  Eric J. W. Visser,et al.  FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0 , 2014, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[12]  R. Fisher,et al.  Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[13]  Bruce D Cheson,et al.  Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  N. Aide,et al.  The importance of harmonizing interim positron emission tomography in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: focus on the Deauville criteria , 2014, Haematologica.

[15]  Alexandre Cochet,et al.  Baseline metabolic tumour volume is an independent prognostic factor in Hodgkin lymphoma , 2014, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[16]  R. Lhommel,et al.  Quantitative and qualitative analysis of metabolic response at interim positron emission tomography scan combined with International Prognostic Index is highly predictive of outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma , 2014, Leukemia and Lymphoma.

[17]  D. Hasenclever,et al.  qPET – a quantitative extension of the Deauville scale to assess response in interim FDG-PET scans in lymphoma , 2014, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[18]  H. Tilly,et al.  An international confirmatory study of the prognostic value of early PET/CT in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: comparison between Deauville criteria and ΔSUVmax , 2013, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[19]  S. Barrington,et al.  Report on the Third International Workshop on Interim Positron Emission Tomography in Lymphoma held in Menton, France, 26–27 September 2011 and Menton 2011 consensus , 2012, Leukemia & lymphoma.

[20]  S. Ferrero,et al.  Interim 18-FDG-PET/CT failed to predict the outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients treated at the diagnosis with rituximab-CHOP. , 2012, Blood.

[21]  J. Friedberg Relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. , 2011, Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program.

[22]  T. Molina,et al.  Intensified chemotherapy with ACVBP plus rituximab versus standard CHOP plus rituximab for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (LNH03-2B): an open-label randomised phase 3 trial , 2011, The Lancet.

[23]  B. Coiffier,et al.  SUVmax reduction improves early prognosis value of interim positron emission tomography scans in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. , 2011, Blood.

[24]  M. Juweid,et al.  Improvement of Early 18F-FDG PET Interpretation in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Importance of the Reference Background , 2010, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[25]  B. Coiffier,et al.  Long-term outcome of patients in the LNH-98.5 trial, the first randomized study comparing rituximab-CHOP to standard CHOP chemotherapy in DLBCL patients: a study by the Groupe d'Etudes des Lymphomes de l'Adulte. , 2010, Blood.

[26]  A. Rahmouni,et al.  Prognostic Value of Interim 18F-FDG PET in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: SUV-Based Assessment at 4 Cycles of Chemotherapy , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[27]  Emmanuel Itti,et al.  Early 18F-FDG PET for Prediction of Prognosis in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: SUV-Based Assessment Versus Visual Analysis , 2007, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[28]  M. Czuczman,et al.  F-fl uorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography after one cycle of chemotherapy in patients with diff use large B-cell lymphoma: results of a Nordic/US intergroup study , 2015 .