Background: Some parameters of 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ( 18 F-FDG PET/CT) can predict tumor chemosensitivity and survival in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Aim: The aim of the study was to investigate the prognostic value of pre- and post-treatment maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) in 18 F-FDG PET/CT imaging for predicting mortality in patients with HNSCC, as well as its prognostic value in terms of disease progression, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: This retrospective study included 37 patients with a histopathological diagnosis of HNSCCs between 2015 and 2018. In patients with HNSCC, the first 18 F-FDG PET/CT imaging was performed for pre-treatment staging, and the second imaging was performed to evaluate post-treatment response. In these imaging studies, SUVmax values of the primary tumor before and after treatment were determined. After the second imaging, patients were re-evaluated and followed up. ROC analysis was used to determine the predictive value of 18 F-FDG PET/CT SUVmax parameters in terms of death and progression, and Cox regression analysis was used to investigate the prognostic value in terms of OS and PFS. Results: Cut-off value 15 for SUVmax1 (pre-treatment) had a significant predictive value for mortality ( P = 0.02). Cut-off value 3.1 for SUVmax2 (post-treatment) had a significant predictive value for progression ( P = 0.024). In univariate analysis, both SUVmax1 and SUVmax2 values were significant prognostic factors for OS ( P = 0.047, P = 0.004). However, for PFS, only the SUVmax2 value was a significant prognostic factor ( P = 0.001). Conclusion: SUVmax1 value of the primary tumor at diagnosis in HNSCC patients has a predictive value for mortality and a prognostic value for OS. However, the SUVmax2 value in the primary tumor after treatment is a predictive factor for progression and a prognostic factor for both OS and PFS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kandemir et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: