학술논문
Document Type
Academic Journal
Author
Zattoni F; Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padua, 35128 Padua, Italy. fabiozattoni@gmail.com.; Urology Unit, Academical Medical Centre Hospital, 33100 Udine, Italy. fabiozattoni@gmail.com.; Incerti E; Nuclear Medicine Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy. incerti.elena@hsr.it.; Dal Moro F; Department of Surgery, Oncology and Gastroenterology, University of Padua, 35128 Padua, Italy. fabrizio.dalmoro@gmail.com.; Urology Unit, Academical Medical Centre Hospital, 33100 Udine, Italy. fabrizio.dalmoro@gmail.com.; Moschini M; Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy. marco.moschini87@gmail.com.; Castellucci P; Department of Nuclear Medicine, Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, 40138 Bologna, Italy. paolo.castellucci@aosp.bo.it.; Panareo S; Nuclear Medicine Unit, Diagnostic Imaging e Laboratory Medicine Department, University Hospital of Ferrara, 44121 Ferrara, Italy. s.panareo@ospfe.it.; Picchio M; Nuclear Medicine Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy. picchio.maria@hsr.it.; Fallanca F; Nuclear Medicine Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy. fallanca.federico@hsr.it.; Briganti A; Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy. briganti.alberto@hsr.it.; Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, 20132 Milan, Italy. briganti.alberto@hsr.it.; Gallina A; Department of Urology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 20132 Milan, Italy. gallina.andrea@hsr.it.; Fanti S; Department of Nuclear Medicine, Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, 40138 Bologna, Italy. stefano.fanti@aosp.bo.it.; Schiavina R; Department of Urology, Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, 40138 Bologna, Italy. rschiavina@yahoo.it.; Brunocilla E; Department of Urology, Sant'Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, 40138 Bologna, Italy. eugenio.brunocilla@aosp.bo.it.; Rambaldi I; Nuclear Medicine Unit, Diagnostic Imaging e Laboratory Medicine Department, University Hospital of Ferrara, 44121 Ferrara, Italy. i.rambaldi@ospfe.it.; Lowe V; Division of Nuclear Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. vlowe@mayo.edu.; Karnes JR; Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA. Karnes.R@mayo.edu.; Evangelista L; Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, 35128 Padua, Italy. laura.evangelista@iov.veneto.it.
Source
Publisher: MDPI Country of Publication: Switzerland NLM ID: 101526829 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 2072-6694 (Print) Linking ISSN: 20726694 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Cancers (Basel) Subsets: PubMed not MEDLINE
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
2072-6694
Abstract
Objectives : To evaluate the ability of 18 F-labeled fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ( 18 F-FDG PET/CT) to predict survivorship of patients with bladder cancer (BC) and/or upper urinary tract carcinoma (UUTC). Materials : Data from patients who underwent FDG PET/CT for suspicion of recurrent urothelial carcinoma (UC) between 2007 and 2015 were retrospectively collected in a multicenter study. Disease management after the introduction of FDG PET/CT in the diagnostic algorithm was assessed in all patients. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank analysis were computed for survival assessment. A Cox regression analysis was used to identify predictors of recurrence and death, for BC, UUTC, and concomitant BC and UUTC. Results : Data from 286 patients were collected. Of these, 212 had a history of BC, 38 of UUTC and 36 of concomitant BC and UUTC. Patient management was changed in 114/286 (40%) UC patients with the inclusion of FDG PET/CT, particularly in those with BC, reaching 74% ( n = 90/122). After a mean follow-up period of 21 months (Interquartile range: 4-28 mo.), 136 patients (47.4%) had recurrence/progression of disease. Moreover, 131 subjects (45.6%) died. At Kaplan-Meier analyses, patients with BC and positive PET/CT had a worse overall survival than those with a negative scan (log-rank < 0.001). Furthermore, a negative PET/CT scan was associated with a lower recurrence rate than a positive examination, independently from the primary tumor site. At multivariate analysis, in patients with BC and UUTC, a positive FDG PET/CT resulted an independent predictor of disease-free and overall survival ( p < 0,01). Conclusions : FDG PET/CT has the potential to change patient management, particularly for patients with BC. Furthermore, it can be considered a valid survival prediction tool after primary treatment in patients with recurrent UC. However, a firm recommendation cannot be made yet. Further prospective studies are necessary to confirm our findings.