High total metabolic tumor volume in PET/CT predicts worse prognosis in diffuse large B cell lymphoma patients with bone marrow involvement in rituximab era

2016 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moo-Kon Song ◽  
Deok-Hwan Yang ◽  
Gyeong-Won Lee ◽  
Sung-Nam Lim ◽  
Seunghyeon Shin ◽  
...  
2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (15) ◽  
pp. 3801-3809 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Ségolène Cottereau ◽  
Hélène Lanic ◽  
Sylvain Mareschal ◽  
Michel Meignan ◽  
Pierre Vera ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihee Kim ◽  
Seo-Yeon Ahn ◽  
Jae-Sook Ahn ◽  
Ga-Young Song ◽  
Sung-Hoon Jung ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), bone marrow involvement (BMI) has an important clinical implication as a component of staging and International Prognostic Index (IPI). Methods This study aimed to determine whether molecular analysis of immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH) genes and PET/CT could overcome the limitation of defining morphologic bone marrow involvement by trephination biopsy and could increase the diagnostic accuracy or prognostic prediction. 94 de novo patients with DLBCL underwent PET/CT, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for detection of IgH gene rearrangement, and unilateral BM trephination at diagnosis. Results 9 patients (9.6%) were confirmed to present morphologic BMI (mBMI) based on trephination biopsy. On the other hands, 21 patients (22.3%) were confirmed to have IgH clonality (IgH BMI), while 16 (17.0%) were classified with BMI based on the assessment of PET/CT (PET BMI). Each IgH rearrangement PCR and PET/CT showed the high negative predict value of detecting the BMI. However, the combined assessment of IgH rearrangement and PET/CT could increase a diagnostic accuracy and specificity with 87.2% and 97.0%, respectively. The survival outcome of patients with double positive PET BMI and IgH BMI was significantly worse than that with either single positive PET BMI or IgH BMI, and even less than patients with neither PET BMI nor IgH BMI. (3-year PFS: 50.0% vs 75.4% vs 97.9%, p = 0.007, 3-year OS: 50.0% vs 75.6% vs 80.1%, p = 0.035, respectively). Conclusion This study suggested that the combined evaluation of PET/CT and IgH rearrangement could give additional information of predicting therapeutic outcomes in patients with negative morphologic BMI as an important part of the prognosis.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1452-1452
Author(s):  
Anne-Ségolène Cottereau ◽  
Hélène Lanic ◽  
Michel Meignan ◽  
Pierre Vera ◽  
Hervé Tilly ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The addition of rituximab to the CHOP backbone has improved the outcome of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, over 30% of patients still have a high risk of treatment failure or relapses and cannot be selected accurately by the classic prognostic factors. Molecular profiling has individualized categories with different outcomes. Baseline total metabolic tumor volume seems also to be an important tool to predict outcome in DLBCL, as demonstrated by Casasnovas (Casasnovas et al Hematol Oncol 2015:33,suppl 1) but has not been associated with molecular data. Our study investigated the prognostic impact of baseline PET metrics, including total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV0) and their added value to molecular characteristics (ABC/GCB status, MYC overexpression). Methods: From 2003 to 2009, 81 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were retrospectively included. They were treated with rituximab associated with CHOP or ACVBP regimen. All had a baseline FDG-PET/CT. TMTV0 was computed by summing the metabolic volumes of all nodal and extranodal lesions obtained using the 41% SUVmax thresholding method. According to the gene expression profile (GEP), determined using DASL (cDNA-mediated Annealing, Selection, Ligation and extension), a subset of 57 patients was classified in GCB or ABC subtypes. An exploratory analysis was done on MYC expression. Optimal cut points for binary outcome were determined by X-tile" and ROC analysis. Results: 81 patients with a median age of 66 years were enrolled: 80% were stage III/IV, 73% had elevated LDH, 67% IPIaa>1. Median pre-therapy TMTV0 was 320 cm3 (25th-75th percentiles 106-668 cm3). With a median follow-up of 64 months, the 5y-PFS was 60% and the 5y-OS was 63% in the whole population. Using a cut off of 300 cm3, patients with a high TMTV0 (n=43, 53%) had a significantly shorter PFS and OS than those with a low TMTV0 (5y-PFS: 76% vs. 43%, p=0.0023, HR=3.0 and 5y-OS: 78% vs. 46%, p=0.0047, HR=3.0). Patients with a high TMTV0 had a more aggressive disease, with significantly more advanced stage (100%) and higher frequency of IPIaa>1 (93%) than patients with a low TMTV0 (p<0.0001 and p<0.0001 respectively). As expected, ABC status (n=27) was associated with a worse outcome (5y-PFS: 38% vs. 70%, p=0.019, HR=2.4; 5y-OS:37% vs 73%, p=0.0046, HR=3.1). In multivariate analysis, TMTV0 and cells of origin were independent prognostic factors for PFS (p=0.028 and p=0.038 respectively) and OS (p=0.035 and p=0.013). Combining these two factors, TMTV0 allowed a better sub-stratification of ABC/GCB patients (p=0.013 for PFS and p=0.0036 for OS). GCB patients with small TMTV0(n=15) had a 87% 5y-PFS and 86% 5y-OS compared to 53% and 60% for GCB with high TMTV0 (n=15); ABC patients with small TMTV0 (n=11) 50% and 60% compared to 30% and 23% for ABC with high TMTV (n=16) (figure 1). Patients with overexpression of MYC (n=26) had an increased risk of relapse or progression (p=0.0032, HR=3.08) and a reduced survival rates (p=0.0004, HR=4.25). Combining MYC with TMTV0 gave an added prognostic value by splitting the population in 3 risk groups: MYC negative and low TMTV0 (n=16, 5y-PFS of 93% and 5y-OS 93%) ; MYC negative and high TMTV0 (n=15, 45% and 55%) ; MYC positive whatever TMTV0 (n=26, 30% and 30%), p=0.0011 and p=0.0005 respectively. Conclusion: The addition of TMTV0 improved the risk stratification of ABC/GCB subtypes and MYC expression. The combination of molecular and imaging characteristicts at diagnosis could lead to a more accurate selection of patients, in order to increase tailor therapy. Figure 1. Kaplan Meier estimates of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to the baseline total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV0) combining with ABC/GCB Figure 1. Kaplan Meier estimates of progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) according to the baseline total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV0) combining with ABC/GCB Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2017 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. v362
Author(s):  
A. Bulbul ◽  
E.A. Mino ◽  
S. Chouial ◽  
A. Bautista ◽  
A. Mustafa ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 91 (5) ◽  
pp. 687-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junshik Hong ◽  
Yukyung Lee ◽  
Yeonjeong Park ◽  
Seog Gyun Kim ◽  
Kyung Hoon Hwang ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 117955492095309
Author(s):  
Ahmad Al-Sabbagh ◽  
Feryal Ibrahim ◽  
Lajos Szabados ◽  
Dina S Soliman ◽  
Ruba Y Taha ◽  
...  

Introduction: In the era of routine use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) for staging, it is not yet clear whether PET/CT can replace bone marrow biopsy for the assessment of bone marrow involvement in large B-cell lymphoma. Objectives: To compare the clinical utility of bone marrow biopsy and PET/CT scanning in the staging of large B-cell lymphoma. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of all patients who presented to single center over a 4-year period with large B-cell lymphoma who had concurrent PET/CT and bone marrow biopsy performed in the assessment and staging of the lymphoma. Results: Out of 89 patients, 24 had bone marrow involvement either by PET/CT, by bone marrow biopsy, or by both. Bone marrow biopsy identified 12 patients (sensitivity 50%, specificity 100%, negative predictive value 84%), whereas PET/CT identified 23 patients (sensitivity 96%, specificity 100%, negative predictive value 98%). No patients were upstaged by the bone marrow biopsy result, and no patients had their treatment plan changed based on the bone marrow biopsy result. Conclusion: The results show that PET-CT is more sensitive and has better negative predictive value than bone marrow biopsy. This suggests that PET-CT could replace bone marrow biopsy in detecting bone marrow involvement for staging of large B-cell lymphoma.


2017 ◽  
Vol 58 (12) ◽  
pp. 1476-1484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra R Teagle ◽  
Hannah Barton ◽  
Elizabeth Charles-Edwards ◽  
Sabina Dizdarevic ◽  
Timothy Chevassut

Background Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) accounts for around 4% of new cancer cases annually. Bone marrow involvement is important for staging and management. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) is used increasingly to identify this, in addition to bone marrow biopsy (BMB), which is seen as “gold” reference standard. Purpose To compare determination of bone marrow involvement by FDG PET/CT against BMB in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL). Material and Methods This was a retrospective study of patients with histologically confirmed NHL at a single UK cancer center undergoing pre-treatment FDG PET/CT and BMB between June 2010 and February 2013. Information was collected from patient notes, cancer registry, histological and imaging reports. Diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET/CT was determined, compared to BMB as the reference standard. Results Twenty-four patients with DLBCL and 12 with FL were included. Five DLBCL patients had bone marrow involvement on PET/CT; all were confirmed on BMB. Three FL patients had marrow involvement on PET/CT but not on BMB; one FL patient had positive BMB but negative PET/CT. Using BMB as the reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET/CT for detecting bone marrow involvement in DLBCL were 100% and 100%, respectively, and in FL were 0% and 72.7%, respectively. Conclusion FDG PET/CT is accurate for detection of bone marrow involvement in newly diagnosed DLBCL, but not FL. In DLBCL, positive FDG PET/CT may negate the need for routine BMB, although BMB in addition or combination may be appropriate if this would influence management or prognosis.


2012 ◽  
Vol 103 (3) ◽  
pp. 477-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moo-Kon Song ◽  
Joo-Seop Chung ◽  
Ho-Jin Shin ◽  
Joon-Ho Moon ◽  
Jeong-Ok Lee ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document