18F-FACBC and 18F-FDG PET/MRI in the evaluation of 3 patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: This PET/MRI study compared contrast-enhanced MRI, 18F-FACBC-, and 18F-FDG-PET in the detection of primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSL) in patients before and after high-dose methotrexate chemotherapy. Three immunocompetent PCNSL patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma received dynamic 18F-FACBC- and 18F-FDG-PET/MRI at baseline and response assessment. Lesion detection was defined by clinical evaluation of contrast enhanced T1 MRI (ce-MRI) and visual PET tracer uptake. SUVs and tumor-to-background ratios (TBRs) (for 18F-FACBC and 18F-FDG) and time-activity curves (for 18F-FACBC) were assessed. RESULTS: At baseline, seven ce-MRI detected lesions were also detected with 18F-FACBC with high SUVs and TBRs (SUVmax:mean, 4.73, TBRmax: mean, 9.32, SUVpeak: mean, 3.21, TBRpeak:mean: 6.30). High TBR values of 18F-FACBC detected lesions were attributed to low SUVbackground. Baseline 18F-FDG detected six lesions with high SUVs (SUVmax: mean, 13.88). In response scans, two lesions were detected with ce-MRI, while only one was detected with 18F-FACBC. The lesion not detected with 18F-FACBC was a small atypical MRI detected lesion, which may indicate no residual disease, as this patient was still in complete remission 12 months after initial diagnosis. No lesions were detected with 18F-FDG in the response scans. CONCLUSIONS: 18F-FACBC provided high tumor contrast, outperforming 18F-FDG in lesion detection at both baseline and in response assessment. 18F-FACBC may be a useful supplement to ce-MRI in PCNSL detection and response assessment, but further studies are required to validate these findings. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov. Registered 15th of June 2017 (Identifier: NCT03188354, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03188354 ).

Prognostic value of combined MTV and ADC derived from baseline FDG PET/MRI in aggressive non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

PURPOSE: The aim of this prospective study was to investigate the prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) from baseline FDG PET/MRI compared to established clinical risk factors in terms of progression free survival (PFS) at 2 years in a cohort of diffuse large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) and high-grade-B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL). METHODS: Thirty-three patients and their baseline PET/MRI examinations were included. Images were read by two pairs of nuclear medicine physicians and radiologists for defining lymphoma lesions. MTV was computed on PET, and up to six lymphoma target lesions with restricted diffusion was defined for each PET/MRI examination. Minimum ADC (ADCmin) and the corresponding mean ADC (ADCmean) from the target lesion with the lowest ADCmin were included in the analyses. For the combined PET/MRI parameters, the ratio between MTV and the target lesion with the lowest ADCmin (MTV/ADCmin) and the corresponding ADCmean (MTV/ADCmean) was calculated for each patient. Clinical, histological, and PET/MRI parameters were compared between the treatment failure and treatment response group, while survival analyses for each variable was performed by using univariate Cox regression. In case of significant variables in the Cox regression analyses, Kaplan-Meier survival analyses with log-rank test was used to study the effect of the variables on PFS. RESULTS: ECOC PS scale ≥2 (p = 0.05) and ADCmean (p = 0.05) were significantly different between the treatment failure group (n = 6) and those with treatment response (n = 27). Survival analyses showed that ADCmean was associated with PFS (p = 0.02, [HR 2.3 for 1 SD increase]), while combining MTV and ADC did not predict outcome. In addition, ECOG PS ≥2 (p = 0.01, [HR 13.3]) and histology of HGBCL (p = 0.02 [HR 7.6]) was significantly associated with PFS. CONCLUSIONS: ADCmean derived from baseline MRI could be a prognostic imaging biomarker for DLBCL and HGBCL. Baseline staging with PET/MRI could therefore give supplementary prognostic information compared to today's standard PET/CT.

A comparison of FDG PET/MR and PET/CT for staging, response assessment, and prognostic imaging biomarkers in lymphoma.

The aim of the current study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of FDG PET/MR compared to PET/CT in a patient cohort including Hodgkins lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and high-grade B-cell lymphoma at baseline and response assessment. Sixty-one patients were examined with FDG PET/CT directly followed by PET/MR. Images were read by two pairs of nuclear medicine physicians and radiologists. Concordance for lymphoma involvement between PET/MR and the reference standard PET/CT was assessed at baseline and response assessment. Correlation of prognostic biomarkers Deauville score, criteria of response, SUVmax, SUVpeak, and MTV was performed between PET/MR and PET/CT. Baseline FDG PET/MR showed a sensitivity of 92.5% and a specificity 97.9% compared to the reference standard PET/CT (κ 0.91) for nodal sites. For extranodal sites, a sensitivity of 80.4% and a specificity of 99.5% were found (κ 0.84). Concordance in Ann Arbor was found in 57 of 61 patients (κ 0.92). Discrepancies were due to misclassification of region and not lesion detection. In response assessment, a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity 99.9% for all sites combined were found (κ 0.92). There was a perfect agreement on Deauville scores 4 and 5 and criteria of response between the two modalities. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for SUVmax, SUVpeak, and MTV values showed excellent reliability (ICC > 0.9). FDG PET/MR is a reliable alternative to PET/CT in this patient population, both in terms of lesion detection at baseline staging and response assessment, and for quantitative prognostic imaging biomarkers.