Efficacy of 4′-[methyl-11C] thiothymidine PET/CT before and after neoadjuvant therapy for predicting therapeutic responses in patients with esophageal cancer: a pilot study
Hotta et al. EJNMMI Research
(2019) 9:10
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-019-0478-9
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Open Access
Efficacy of 4′-[methyl-11C] thiothymidine
PET/CT before and after neoadjuvant
therapy for predicting therapeutic
responses in patients with esophageal
cancer: a pilot study
Masatoshi Hotta1,4* , Ryogo Minamimoto1, Kazuhiko Yamada2, Kyoko Nohara2, Daisuke Soma2,
Kazuhiko Nakajima1, Jun Toyohara3 and Kei Takase4
Abstract
Background: 4′-[Methyl-11C] thiothymidine (4DST) has been introduced as a new cell proliferation imaging PET tracer
that incorporates into DNA directly. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of 4DST PET/CT for
predicting responses to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal cancer comparing with FDG PET/CT.
Methods: Twenty-six patients who had pre- and post-therapeutic 4DST and FDG PET/CT and underwent
esophagectomy following neoadjuvant therapy were used for the analysis. Based on pathological findings, patients
were divided into two groups: non-responders and responders. The maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax),
metabolic tumor volume, total lesion glycolysis, and total lesion proliferation of the primary lesion were measured for
FDG and 4DST PET.
Results: The pathological diagnosis revealed 16 responders and 10 non-responders. Non-responders showed
significantly higher 4DST post-therapeutic SUVmax (postSUVmax) than responders, whereas FDG postSUVmax showed no
statistically significant difference (non-responders vs. responders: 4DST, 6.7 vs. 3.3, p = 0.001; FDG, 6.1 vs. 4.5, p = 0.11).
Responders showed a greater reduction in percentage changes of 4DST and FDG SUVmax (ΔSUVmax) from baseline to
post-therapeutic PET (non-responders vs. responders: 4DST, − 2.9% vs. − 56.7%, p < 0.001; FDG, − 36.3% vs. − 72.6%,
p < 0.001). In ROC analysis, ΔSUVmax and postSUVmax with 4DST provided great diagnostic performance for predicting
responses (area under the curve: 4DST ΔSUVmax = 0.92, 4DST postSUVmax = 0.88).
Conclusions: 4DST PET/CT has a great potential for predicting pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients
with esophageal cancer; it may be slightly superior to that with FDG PET/CT.
Keywords: 4DST, Esophageal cancer, PET/CT, FDG, Therapeutic response
* Correspondence:
1
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, National Center for
Global Health and Medicine, 1-21-1, Toyama, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8655,
Japan
4
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tohoku University Hospital, 1-1,
Seiryo-machi, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8574, Japan
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to
the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
Hotta et al. EJNMMI Research
(2019) 9:10
Background
The prognosis of patients with advanced esophageal cancer continues to be poor, despite advances in management. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation
therapy before esophagectomy is a standard-of-care and
commonly applied in clinical practice for locally
advanced and operable esophageal cancer [1–3]. Once
neoadjuvant therapy is completed, assessment of response is necessary [3]. When a persistent local lesion is
indicated, esophagectomy is strongly recommended because the presence of residual tumor after neoadjuvant
therapy in the resected specimen leads to shorter overall
survival [3–5]. On the contrary, if there is no evidence
of residual viable lesion, surveillance can be a possible
option [3]. Generally, FDG PET/CT and/or contrastenhanced chest CT is used for the evaluation of treatment response of neoadjuvant therapy in esophageal
cancer [3]. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish a
viable residual tumor form reactive changes with a chest
CT. In contrast, FDG PET/CT provides a more accurate
diagnosis compared to that with chest CT due to its
evaluation of metabolic activity. However, the value of
FDG-PET/CT for evaluating response to neoadjuvant
therapy in esophageal cancer is still controversial [6–8],
so it is basically not recommended for the selection of
patients for esophagectomy following neoadjuvant
therapy [3].
Recently, Toyohara et al. developed 4′-[methyl-11C]
thiothymidine (4DST) as a new DNA synthesis imaging
agent [9, 10]. Although 3′-fluoro-3′-deoxythymidine
Fig. 1 Flow diagram of patient selection
Page 2 of 9
(FLT) has been established as a cell proliferation PET
tracer, 4DST has advantages for proliferation measurement [11]. 4DST incorporates into DNA directly,
whereas FLT does not incorporate into DNA and reflects
salvage pathway of DNA synthesis [12]. We have previously reported on the great potential of 4DST PET/CT
for proliferation imaging in malignancies such as lung
cancer and renal cell carcinoma [13–15]. In addition,
Hoshikawa et al. have reported that 4DST PET shows a
higher prognostic value in patients with head and neck
carcinoma compared to FDG PET [16].
These results suggest that 4DST PET can potentially
predict a response to neoadjuvant therapy in esophageal
cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of 4DST for predicting response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal cancer as
compared to that with FDG.
Methods
Patients
This prospective study was approved by the institutional
review board of our hospital, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. We enrolled patients
with biopsy-proven esophageal cancer. A total of 49 consecutive treatment-naïve patients underwent baseline
4DST and FDG PET/CT from August 2015 to September 2018 and were assessed for eligibility for this prospective study (Fig. 1). Among them, 11 patients were
treated with definitive chemoradiation therapy (8 patients declined to undertake esophagectomy, and 3
Hotta et al. EJNMMI Research
(2019) 9:10
Page 3 of 9
patients were regarded as inoperable due to newly diagnosed lung and/or bone metastasis), 5 patients were
treated with esophagectomy without neoadjuvant therapy, and 5 patients did not have 4DST and/or FDG PET/
CT after neoadjuvant therapy. In addition, 2 patients
with adenocarcinoma were excluded because of the
different biological entity between adenocarcinoma and
squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, we analyzed 26
patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
(23 men and 3 women, mean ± SD age 66.4 ± 9.7 years).
They all underwent esophagectomy following neoadjuvant therapy. Exclusion criteria for these 26 patients
were (1) uncontrolled diabetes or (2) non-avid tumors
on FDG or 4DST PET/CT, but no patients met these exclusion criteria. Patients’ demographics including tumor
markers are shown in Table 1. Regarding the regimen (...truncated)