Objectives: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the prognostic importance of 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose ( 18 F-FDG)-positive pelvic lymph nodes (LNs) and extra-pelvic disease on staging 18 F-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with bladder cancer.Methods: Bladder cancer patients who underwent staging 18 F-FDG PET/CT were included in the study.Histopathologic features of tumors, therapy histories, presence of distinguishable tumors on CT and PET images, sizes and maximum standardized uptake value (SUV max ) of primary tumors, total numbers, sizes, and SUV max of 18 F-FDG-positive pelvic and extra-pelvic LNs, and total numbers and SUV max of distant metastases (M1a/1b) were recorded.Patients were followed up until death or the last medical visit.Factors predicting overall survival were determined using Cox regression analysis.Results: Fifty-five patients [median age: 70 (53-84), 48 (87.3%) male, 7 (12.7%)female] with bladder cancer were included in this study.Twentynine (52.7%) patients had 18 F-FDG positive pelvic LNs, while 24 (43.7%)patients had 18 F-FDG positive extra-pelvic disease.Patients with 18 F-FDGpositive pelvic LNs had a higher rate of extra-pelvic disease (p=0.003).The median follow-up duration was 13.5 months.The median overall survival was 16.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.9-23.7].The primary tumor distinguishability on PET (p=0.011) and CT (p=0.009)images, the presence of 18 F-FDG-positive pelvic LNs (p<0.001) and 18 F-FDG-positive extra-pelvic disease/distant metastases (M1a/M1b) (p<0.001), and the number of distant metastases (p=0.034) were associated with mortality.The 18 F-FDG-positive extra-pelvic disease/distant metastases [p=0.029,odds ratio: 4.15 (95% CI 1.16-14.86)]was found to be an independent predictor of mortality in patients with bladder cancer. Conclusion:The presence of 18 F-FDG-positive extra-pelvic disease in pretreatment 18 F-FDG PET/CT is an important prognostic factor in bladder cancer patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ateş et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: