PET imaging with [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine for prediction of response to neoadjuvant treatment in patients with rectal cancer

Hinrich A. Wieder, Hans Geinitz, Robert Rosenberg, Florian Lordick, Karen Becker, Alexander Stahl, Ernst Rummeny, Jörg R. Siewert, Markus Schwaiger, Jens Stollfuss

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

107 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: Positron emission tomography (PET) using 18F-labelled 3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine (FLT) was assessed for therapy monitoring in patients with rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Methods: Ten patients with locally advanced rectal cancer were included and underwent long-course preoperative chemoradiotherapy (total dose 45 Gy, 1.8 Gy/day, concomitant 250 mg/m2 5-fluorouracil) followed by surgery. FLT-PET was performed prior to chemoradiotherapy, 2 weeks after initiation of chemoradiotherapy and preoperatively (3-4 weeks post chemoradiotherapy). FLT uptake was correlated with histopathological tumour regression and changes in T stage. Results: Mean tumour FLT uptake was 4.2±1.0 SUV before therapy and decreased significantly to 2.9 ± 0.6 SUV 14 days after initiation of chemoradiotherapy (-28.6% ± 10.7%, p = 0.005). The preoperative scan showed a further decrease to 1.9 ± 0.4 SUV (-54.7% ± 7.6%, p = 0.005). However, the degree of change in FLT uptake 2 weeks after initiation and after completion of neoadjuvant therapy did not correlate with histopathological tumour regression. Conclusion: FLT-PET did not seem to be a promising method for assessment of tumour response in the studied chemoradiotherapy regimen in patients with rectal cancer.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)878-883
Number of pages6
JournalEuropean Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Volume34
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2007

Keywords

  • FLT-PET
  • Proliferation
  • Rectal cancer
  • Therapy monitoring

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'PET imaging with [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine for prediction of response to neoadjuvant treatment in patients with rectal cancer'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this