PET/CT in Cancers Outcomes Prediction

A special issue of Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694). This special issue belongs to the section "Methods and Technologies Development".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 28 February 2025 | Viewed by 2686

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
Interests: nuclear medicine; radiology
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

We are pleased to invite you to contribute to this Special Issue of Cancers on “PET/CT in Cancers Outcomes Prediction”. Cancers remain one of the top leading causes of mortality worldwide, and prediction of outcome is the mainstay in improving oncologic management. During past 20 years, PET imaging has contributed enormously to this process by providing whole body status of viable tumors, which is crucial to improve prognostication, therapeutic planning, and surveillance. With more recent advances in PET imaging including multiple new, target-specific radiotracers and improved resolution of the PET/CT machines, PET has become an indispensable tool in oncologic management as recommended by the NCCN guidelines for various tumors. There remain many areas of active investigation in using PET in tailoring oncologic management, especially in the case of novel therapies such as immunotherapy and PSMA-based radioligand therapy. At a molecular level, there is a need to better understand the mechanisms underlying the uptake of radiotracers to apply them to the clinical implications.  This Special Issue focuses on applications of PET/CT imaging in the prediction of outcome in cancers and aims to cover new advances in PET imaging, including radiomics, theragnostic radionuclide pairs, and machine learning, which have opened new horizons in the application of quantitative and automated analysis of PET/CTs in oncologic imaging and management. Applications of PET in novel therapies such as CAR T-cell therapy and in cases of rare tumors are also of special interest.

Dr. Ahmad Shariftabrizi
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Cancers is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • FDG PET/CT
  • PSMA PET/CT
  • dotatate PET/CT
  • tumor heterogeneity
  • radiomics
  • CAR T-cell therapy
  • rare tumors
  • radiogenomics
  • immunotherapy
  • targeted therapy
  • PET physics
  • radiotracer metabolism

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

16 pages, 750 KiB  
Article
Evaluating Outcome Prediction via Baseline, End-of-Treatment, and Delta Radiomics on PET-CT Images of Primary Mediastinal Large B-Cell Lymphoma
by Fereshteh Yousefirizi, Claire Gowdy, Ivan S. Klyuzhin, Maziar Sabouri, Petter Tonseth, Anna R. Hayden, Donald Wilson, Laurie H. Sehn, David W. Scott, Christian Steidl, Kerry J. Savage, Carlos F. Uribe and Arman Rahmim
Cancers 2024, 16(6), 1090; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16061090 - 8 Mar 2024
Viewed by 1081
Abstract
Objectives: Accurate outcome prediction is important for making informed clinical decisions in cancer treatment. In this study, we assessed the feasibility of using changes in radiomic features over time (Delta radiomics: absolute and relative) following chemotherapy, to predict relapse/progression and time to progression [...] Read more.
Objectives: Accurate outcome prediction is important for making informed clinical decisions in cancer treatment. In this study, we assessed the feasibility of using changes in radiomic features over time (Delta radiomics: absolute and relative) following chemotherapy, to predict relapse/progression and time to progression (TTP) of primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) patients. Material and Methods: Given the lack of standard staging PET scans until 2011, only 31 out of 103 PMBCL patients in our retrospective study had both pre-treatment and end-of-treatment (EoT) scans. Consequently, our radiomics analysis focused on these 31 patients who underwent [18F]FDG PET-CT scans before and after R-CHOP chemotherapy. Expert manual lesion segmentation was conducted on their scans for delta radiomics analysis, along with an additional 19 EoT scans, totaling 50 segmented scans for single time point analysis. Radiomics features (on PET and CT), along with maximum and mean standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean), total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV), tumor dissemination (Dmax), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), and the area under the curve of cumulative standardized uptake value-volume histogram (AUC-CSH) were calculated. We additionally applied longitudinal analysis using radial mean intensity (RIM) changes. For prediction of relapse/progression, we utilized the individual coefficient approximation for risk estimation (ICARE) and machine learning (ML) techniques (K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), and Random Forest (RF)) including sequential feature selection (SFS) following correlation analysis for feature selection. For TTP, ICARE and CoxNet approaches were utilized. In all models, we used nested cross-validation (CV) (with 10 outer folds and 5 repetitions, along with 5 inner folds and 20 repetitions) after balancing the dataset using Synthetic Minority Oversampling TEchnique (SMOTE). Results: To predict relapse/progression using Delta radiomics between the baseline (staging) and EoT scans, the best performances in terms of accuracy and F1 score (F1 score is the harmonic mean of precision and recall, where precision is the ratio of true positives to the sum of true positives and false positives, and recall is the ratio of true positives to the sum of true positives and false negatives) were achieved with ICARE (accuracy = 0.81 ± 0.15, F1 = 0.77 ± 0.18), RF (accuracy = 0.89 ± 0.04, F1 = 0.87 ± 0.04), and LDA (accuracy = 0.89 ± 0.03, F1 = 0.89 ± 0.03), that are higher compared to the predictive power achieved by using only EoT radiomics features. For the second category of our analysis, TTP prediction, the best performer was CoxNet (LASSO feature selection) with c-index = 0.67 ± 0.06 when using baseline + Delta features (inclusion of both baseline and Delta features). The TTP results via Delta radiomics were comparable to the use of radiomics features extracted from EoT scans for TTP analysis (c-index = 0.68 ± 0.09) using CoxNet (with SFS). The performance of Deauville Score (DS) for TTP was c-index = 0.66 ± 0.09 for n = 50 and 0.67 ± 03 for n = 31 cases when using EoT scans with no significant differences compared to the radiomics signature from either EoT scans or baseline + Delta features (p-value> 0.05). Conclusion: This work demonstrates the potential of Delta radiomics and the importance of using EoT scans to predict progression and TTP from PMBCL [18F]FDG PET-CT scans. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue PET/CT in Cancers Outcomes Prediction)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1827 KiB  
Article
Preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT in Patients with Presumed Localized Colon Cancer: A Prospective Study with Long-Term Follow-Up
by Samuel Aymard, Edmond Rust, Ashjan Kaseb, David Liu, Fabrice Hubele, Benoit Romain, Gerlinde Averous, Cecile Brigand and Alessio Imperiale
Cancers 2024, 16(1), 233; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16010233 - 4 Jan 2024
Viewed by 1277
Abstract
We analyzed whether preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT adds to conventional primary staging in patients with presumed non-metastatic colonic cancer (CC). The prognostic role of 18F-FDG uptake in the primary tumor was evaluated after a mean follow-up of 15 years. Patients with a [...] Read more.
We analyzed whether preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT adds to conventional primary staging in patients with presumed non-metastatic colonic cancer (CC). The prognostic role of 18F-FDG uptake in the primary tumor was evaluated after a mean follow-up of 15 years. Patients with a new diagnosis of presumed localized CC were prospectively enrolled and underwent presurgical 18F-FDG PET/CT. For each colon lesion, SUVmax, SUVpeak, TLG, and MTV were assessed and tested as prognostic factors. Forty-eight patients were included. Post-surgery pathology identified a total of 103 colon lesions, including 58 invasive adenocarcinomas, 4 in situ adenocarcinomas, 3 adenomas with high-grade dysplasia, and 38 adenomas with low-grade dysplasia. Per lesion sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) for colonic primary tumor detection were 78%, 97%, 98%, and 73% for conventional workup, and 94%, 87%, 92%, and 89% for 18F-FDG PET/CT. Only sensitivity was significantly different between 18F-FDG PET/CT and conventional workup. PET detected an additional ten pathological colonic lesions in seven patients. SUVmax, SUVpeak, and TLG showed significant differences between invasive adenocarcinomas, in situ adenocarcinomas, and high-grade dysplasia compared to low-grade dysplasia. There was a statistically significant difference between pT1-pT2 and pT3-pT4 adenocarcinomas. On patient-based analysis, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for nodal staging were 22%, 84%, 44%, and 65% for CECT, and 33%, 90%, 67%, and 70% for 18F-FDG PET/CT, without a statistically significant difference. PET/CT also identified unknown metastatic spread and one synchronous lung cancer in four patients. Overall, 18F-FDG PETCT had an additional diagnostic value in 11 out of 48 patients (23%). 18F-FDG uptake of the primary tumor did not predict nodal or distant metastases. The difference in disease-free survival categorized by median SUVmax, SUVpeak, TLG, and MTV was not significant. Finally, preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT is valuable in detecting potential colon lesions not visualized by conventional workups, especially in cases of incomplete colonoscopy. It effectively highlights distant metastases but exhibits limitations for N staging. Mainly due to the relatively small sample size, the quantitative analysis of 18F-FDG uptake in the primary tumor did not reveal any association with recurrence or disease-free survival, adding no significant prognostic information. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue PET/CT in Cancers Outcomes Prediction)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop