Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Prognostic Significance of Standardized Uptake Value on (18)Fluorine-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic significance of standardized uptake value (SUV) on 18 fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Thirty-four patients who have histologically proven NPC and underwent (18)F-FDG PET/CT were included in this study. After (18)F-FDG PET/CT, all the patients received radiation therapy and 32 of them received concomitant weekly chemotherapy. The maximum SUV (SUVmax) at the primary tumor and the SUVmaxof the highest neck nodes were determined. The SUVmax-T ranged from 5.00 to 30.80 (mean: 15.37 ± 6.10) and there was no difference between SUVmax-T values for early and late stages (P = 0.99). The SUVmax-N ranged from 3.10 to 23.80 (mean: 13.23 ± 5.76). There was no correlation between SUVmax-T and SUVmax-N (r = 0.111, P = 0.532). There was no difference between the SUVmax-T and the positivity of neck lymph nodes (P = 0.169). The ability of SUVmaks-N to predict stage was obtained by a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The area under the curve is 0.856 and the best cut-off value is 7.88. There was a good correlation between SUVmax-N and stage. While the mean SUVmax-T for the alive patients was slightly lower than that for the dead (14.65 ± 5.58 vs. 20.30 ± 7.92, P = 0.061), the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference for SUVmax-N between these two groups (P: 0.494). Cox-regression analysis showed that an increase in SUVmax-T and SUVmax-N was associated with death risk (relative risk [RR]: 1.13, P = 0.078 and RR: 1.052, P = 0.456, respectively). SUVmax-T and SUVmax-N were independent prognostic factors for survival in NPC patients. This will help the clinicians in choosing suitable candidates for more aggressive treatment modalities.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app