Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32730364›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Prognostic value of baseline [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography parameters MTV, TLG and asphericity in an international multicenter cohort of nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients.

Sebastian Zschaeck, Yimin Li, Qin Lin, Marcus Beck, Holger Amthauer, Laura Bauersachs, Marina Hajiyianni, Julian Rogasch, Vincent H Ehrhardt, Goda Kalinauskaite and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Correlation between [Cancers · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Focal Nasopharyngeal Activity Detected on [Nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2022
    Article
  8. Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sebastian ZschaeckCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3109-0662
Yimin LiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Cancer Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
Qin LinDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Xiamen Cancer Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
Marcus BeckCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Holger AmthauerDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
Laura BauersachsCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Marina HajiyianniCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Julian RogaschDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany.
Vincent H EhrhardtCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Goda KalinauskaiteCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Julian WeingärtnerCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Vivian HartmannCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jörg van den HoffDepartment of Positron Emission Tomography, Institute of Radiopharmaceutical Cancer Research, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Volker BudachCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Carmen StrombergerCharité -Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Frank HofheinzDepartment of Positron Emission Tomography, Institute of Radiopharmaceutical Cancer Research, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, Dresden, Germany.
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DEFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University · CNHelmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose[18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) parameters have shown prognostic value in nasopharyngeal carcinomas (NPC), mostly in monocenter studies. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic impact of standard and novel PET parameters in a multicenter cohort of patients.

methodsThe established PET parameters metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG) and maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) as well as the novel parameter tumor asphericity (ASP) were evaluated in a retrospective multicenter cohort of 114 NPC patients with FDG-PET staging, treated with (chemo)radiation at 8 international institutions. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier analysis with respect to overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), distant metastases-free survival (FFDM), and locoregional control (LRC) was performed for clinical and PET parameters.

resultsWhen analyzing metric PET parameters, ASP showed a significant association with EFS (p = 0.035) and a trend for OS (p = 0.058). MTV was significantly associated with EFS (p = 0.026), OS (p = 0.008) and LRC (p = 0.012) and TLG with LRC (p = 0.019). TLG and MTV showed a very high correlation (Spearman's rho = 0.95), therefore TLG was subesequently not further analysed. Optimal cutoff values for defining high and low risk groups were determined by maximization of the p-value in univariate Cox regression considering all possible cutoff values. Generation of stable cutoff values was feasible for MTV (p<0.001), ASP (p = 0.023) and combination of both (MTV+ASP = occurrence of one or both risk factors, p<0.001) for OS and for MTV regarding the endpoints OS (p<0.001) and LRC (p<0.001). In multivariable Cox (age >55 years + one binarized PET parameter), MTV >11.1ml (hazard ratio (HR): 3.57, p<0.001) and ASP > 14.4% (HR: 3.2, p = 0.031) remained prognostic for OS. MTV additionally remained prognostic for LRC (HR: 4.86 p<0.001) and EFS (HR: 2.51 p = 0.004). Bootstrapping analyses showed that a combination of high MTV and ASP improved prognostic value for OS compared to each single variable significantly (p = 0.005 and p = 0.04, respectively). When using the cohort from China (n = 57 patients) for establishment of prognostic parameters and all other patients for validation (n = 57 patients), MTV could be successfully validated as prognostic parameter regarding OS, EFS and LRC (all p-values <0.05 for both cohorts).

conclusionsIn this analysis, PET parameters were associated with outcome of NPC patients. MTV showed a robust association with OS, EFS and LRC. Our data suggest that combination of MTV and ASP may potentially further improve the risk stratification of NPC patients.

Indexed as

GlycolysisChemoradiotherapyFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18Follow-Up StudiesHumansInternational AgenciesMaleMiddle AgedNasopharyngeal CarcinomaNasopharyngeal NeoplasmsPositron-Emission TomographyPrognosisRadiopharmaceuticalsRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID32730364
PMCPMC7392321
OpenAlexW3046837474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.