Original Article

You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

The higher the decrease in the standardized uptake value of positron emission tomography after chemoradiation, the better the survival of patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma

  1. Heta Javeri MD1,
  2. Lianchun Xiao MS2,
  3. Eric Rohren MD3,
  4. Jeffrey H. Lee MD4,
  5. Zhongxing Liao MD5,
  6. Wayne Hofstetter MD6,
  7. Dipen Maru MD7,
  8. Manoop S. Bhutani MD4,
  9. Stephen G. Swisher MD6,
  10. Homer Macapinlac MD3,
  11. Xuemei Wang PhD2,
  12. Jaffer A. Ajani MD1,†,*

Article first published online: 14 AUG 2009

DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24604

Issue

Cancer

Cancer

Volume 115, Issue 22, pages 5184–5192, 15 November 2009

Additional Information

How to Cite

Javeri, H., Xiao, L., Rohren, E., Lee, J. H., Liao, Z., Hofstetter, W., Maru, D., Bhutani, M. S., Swisher, S. G., Macapinlac, H., Wang, X. and Ajani, J. A. (2009), The higher the decrease in the standardized uptake value of positron emission tomography after chemoradiation, the better the survival of patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer, 115: 5184–5192. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24604

Author Information

  1. 1

    Department of Medical Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

  2. 2

    Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

  3. 3

    Department of Nuclear Medicine, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

  4. 4

    Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

  5. 5

    Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

  6. 6

    Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

  7. 7

    Department of Pathology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

  1. †

    Fax: (713) 745-1163

*Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, Unit 426, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 3 NOV 2009
  2. Article first published online: 14 AUG 2009
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 24 FEB 2009
  4. Manuscript Revised: 4 FEB 2009
  5. Manuscript Received: 1 OCT 2008

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (244K)

References

  • 1
    Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2005; 55: 74-108.
    Direct Link:
  • 2
    Pohl H, Welch HG. The role of overdiagnosis and reclassification in the marked increase of esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005; 97: 142-146.
  • 3
    Brown LM, Devesa SS, Chow WH. Incidence of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus among white Americans by sex, stage, and age. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008; 100: 1184-1187.
  • 4
    Bosset JF, Gignoux M, Triboulet JP, et al. Chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone in squamous-cell cancer of the esophagus. N Engl J Med. 1997; 337: 161-167.
  • 5
    Walsh TN, Noonan N, Hollywood D, Kelly A, Keeling N, Hennessy TP. A comparison of multimodal therapy and surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1996; 335: 462-467.
  • 6
    Tepper J, Krasna MJ, Niedzwiecki D, et al. Phase III trial of trimodality therapy with cisplatin, fluorouracil, radiotherapy, and surgery compared with surgery alone for esophageal cancer: CALGB 9781. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 1086-1092.
  • 7
    Urba SG, Orringer MB, Turrisi A, Iannettoni M, Forastiere A, Strawderman M. Randomized trial of preoperative chemoradiation versus surgery alone in patients with locoregional esophageal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19: 305-313.
  • 8
    Ajani JA, Winter K, Komaki R, et al. Phase II randomized trial of 2 nonoperative regimens of induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation in patients with localized carcinoma of the esophagus: RTOG 0113. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 4551-4556.
  • 9
    Kelsen DP, Winter KA, Gunderson LL, et al. Long-term results of RTOG trial 8911 (USA Intergroup 113): a random assignment trial comparison of chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 3719-3725.
  • 10
    Chin L, Gray JW. Translating insights from the cancer genome into clinical practice. Nature. 2008; 452: 553-563.
  • 11
    Sawyers CL. The cancer biomarker problem. Nature. 2008; 452: 548-552.
  • 12
    van't Veer LJ, Bernards R. Enabling personalized cancer medicine through analysis of gene-expression patterns. Nature. 2008; 452: 564-570.
  • 13
    Wu X, Gu J, Wu TT, et al. Genetic variations in radiation and chemotherapy drug action pathways predict clinical outcomes in esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 3789-3798.
  • 14
    Hildebrandt MA, Yang H, Hung MC, et al. Genetic variations in the PI3K/PTEN/AKT/mTOR pathway are associated with clinical outcome in esophageal cancer patients treated with chemoradiotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 857-871.
  • 15
    Rizk NP, Venkatraman E, Bains MS, et al. American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system does not accurately predict survival in patients receiving multimodality therapy for esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 507-512.
  • 16
    Rohatgi PR, Swisher SG, Correa AM, et al. Failure patterns correlate with the proportion of residual carcinoma after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for carcinoma of the esophagus. Cancer. 2005; 104: 1349-1355.
    Direct Link:
  • 17
    Rohatgi P, Swisher SG, Correa AM, et al. Characterization of pathologic complete response after preoperative chemoradiotherapy in carcinoma of the esophagus and outcome after pathologic complete response. Cancer. 2005; 104: 2365-2372.
    Direct Link:
  • 18
    Chirieac LR, Swisher SG, Ajani JA, et al. Posttherapy pathologic stage predicts survival in patients with esophageal carcinoma receiving preoperative chemoradiation. Cancer. 2005; 103: 1347-1355.
    Direct Link:
  • 19
    Flamen P, Lerut A, Van Cutsem E, et al. Utility of positron emission tomography for the staging of patients with potentially operable esophageal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18: 3202-3210.
  • 20
    Hong D, Lunagomez S, Kim EE, et al. Value of baseline positron emission tomography for predicting overall survival in patient with nonmetastatic esophageal or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. Cancer. 2005; 104: 1620-1626.
    Direct Link:
  • 21
    Lordick F, Ott K, Krause BJ, et al. PET to assess early metabolic response and to guide treatment of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction: the MUNICON phase II trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007; 8: 797-805.
  • 22
    Ott K, Herrmann K, Lordick F, et al. Early metabolic response evaluation by fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography allows in vivo testing of chemosensitivity in gastric cancer: long-term results of a prospective study. Clin Cancer Res. 2008; 14: 2012-2018.
  • 23
    Ott K, Weber W, Siewert JR. The importance of PET in the diagnosis and response evaluation of esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2006; 19: 433-442.
    Direct Link:
  • 24
    Swisher SG, Maish M, Erasmus JJ, et al. Utility of PET, CT, and EUS to identify pathologic responders in esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004; 78: 1152-1160; discussion 52-60.
  • 25
    Brucher BL, Weber W, Bauer M, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Ann Surg. 2001; 233: 300-309.
  • 26
    Ott K, Weber WA, Fink U, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in adenocarcinomas of the distal esophagus and cardia. World J Surg. 2003; 27: 1035-1039.
  • 27
    Ott K, Weber WA, Lordick F, et al. Metabolic imaging predicts response, survival, and recurrence in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 4692-4698.
  • 28
    Swisher SG, Erasmus J, Maish M, et al. 2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography imaging is predictive of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer. 2004; 101: 1776-1785.
    Direct Link:
  • 29
    Wieder HA, Brucher BL, Zimmermann F, et al. Time course of tumor metabolic activity during chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and response to treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 900-908.
  • 30
    Siewert JR, Stein HJ. Classification of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction. Br J Surg. 1998; 85: 1457-1459.
    Direct Link:
  • 31
    Wu TT, Chirieac LR, Abraham SC, et al. Excellent interobserver agreement on grading the extent of residual carcinoma after preoperative chemoradiation in esophageal and esophagogastric junction carcinoma: a reliable predictor for patient outcome. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007; 31: 58-64.
  • 32
    Kelloff GJ, Sullivan DM, Wilson W, et al. FDG-PET lymphoma demonstration project invitational workshop. Acad Radiol. 2007; 14: 330-339.
  • 33
    Shankar LK, Sullivan DC. PET/CT in cancer patient management. Commentary. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48( suppl 1): 1S.
  • 34
    Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006; 47: 1059-1066.
  • 35
    Hosmer DWJr, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistics Regression: Applied Probability and Statistics. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2001.
  • 36
    Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Stat Assoc. 1958; 53: 457-481.
  • 37
    Mantel N. Evaluation of survival data and 2 new rank order statistics arising in its consideration. Cancer Chemother Rep. 1996; 60: 163-170.
  • 38
    Cox DR. Regression models and life tables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc B. 1972; 34: 187-220.
  • 39
    Venables WN, Ripley BD. Modern Applied Statistics with Splus. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 1999.
  • 40
    Pantel K, Brakenhoff RH. Dissecting the metastatic cascade. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004; 4: 448-456.
  • 41
    Pantel K, Brakenhoff RH, Brandt B. Detection, clinical relevance and specific biological properties of disseminating tumour cells. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008; 8: 329-340.
  • 42
    Wieder HA, Herrmann K, Ott K, Krause BJ. 18F-FDG-PET in therapy response of esophageal cancer [in German]. Radiologe. 2007; 47: 110-114.
  • 43
    Weissleder R, Pittet MJ. Imaging in the era of molecular oncology. Nature. 2008; 452: 580-589.
  • 44
    Flamen P, Van Cutsem E, Lerut A, et al. Positron emission tomography for assessment of the response to induction radiochemotherapy in locally advanced oesophageal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2002; 13: 361-368.
  • 45
    Wieder HA, Geinitz H, Rosenberg R, et al. PET imaging with [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine for prediction of response to neoadjuvant treatment in patients with rectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007; 34: 878-883.
  • 46
    McLoughlin JM, Melis M, Siegel EM, et al. Are patients with esophageal cancer who become PET negative after neoadjuvant chemoradiation free of cancer? J Am Coll Surg 2008; 206: 879-886; discussion 86-87.
  • 47
    Stahl A, Stollfuss J, Ott K, et al. FDG PET and CT in locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the distal oesophagus. Clinical relevance of a discordant PET finding. Nuklearmedizin 2005; 44: 249-255; quiz N55-N56.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (244K)