Combined Visual and Semiquantitative Evaluation Improves Outcome Prediction by Early Midtreatment 18F-FDG PET in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

The purpose of this study was to assess the predictive and prognostic value of interim FDG PET (iPET) in evaluating early response to immunochemotherapy after 2 cycles (PET-2) in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) by applying 2 different methods of interpretation: the Deauville visual 5-point scale (5-PS) and a change in SUV (ΔSUV) by semiquantitative evaluation. Methods: In total, 145 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL underwent pretreatment PET and PET-2 assessment. PET-2 was classified according to both 5-PS and percentage ΔSUV. Receiver-operating-characteristic analysis was performed to compare the accuracy of the 2 methods for predicting progression-free survival. Survival estimates, based on each method separately and combined, were calculated for iPET-positive (iPET+) and iPET-negative (iPET-) groups and compared. Results: Both with 5-PS and with ΔSUV-based evaluations, significant differences were found between the progression-free survival of iPET- and iPET+ patient groups (P < 0.001). Visually, the best negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) occurred when iPET was defined as positive if the Deauville score was 4-5 (89% and 59%, respectively). Using the 66% ΔSUV cutoff reported previously, NPV and PPV were 80% and 76%, respectively. ΔSUV at the 48.9% cutoff, reported for the first time here, produced 100% specificity along with the highest sensitivity (24%). The 5-PS and a semiquantitative ΔSUV of less than 48.9% for each PET-2 gave the same PET-2 classification (positive or negative) in 70% (102/145) of all patients. This combined classification delivered NPV and PPV of 89% and 100%, respectively, and all iPET+ patients failed to achieve or remain in remission. Conclusion: In this large consistently treated and assessed series of DLBCL patients, iPET had good prognostic value interpreted either visually or semiquantitatively. We determined that the most effective ΔSUV cutoff was 48.9% and that when combined with 5-PS assessment, a positive PET-2 result was highly predictive of treatment failure.

Efficacy, Tolerability, and Biomarker Analyses of Once-Every-2-Weeks Cetuximab Plus First-Line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in Patients With KRAS or All RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Phase 2 APEC Study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with KRAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), outcomes with first-line chemotherapies are improved by adding weekly cetuximab. The APEC study investigated first-line once-every-2-weeks cetuximab plus chemotherapy for patients with KRAS wt mCRC; additional biomarker subgroups were also analyzed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: APEC was a nonrandomized phase 2 trial conducted in the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (n = 289) received once-every-2-weeks cetuximab with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (FOLFOX or FOLFIRI). The primary end point was best confirmed overall response rate (BORR); progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were secondary end points. Early tumor shrinkage (ETS) and depth of response (DpR) were also evaluated. RESULTS: In the KRAS wt population, BORR was 58.8%, median PFS 11.1 months, and median OS 26.8 months. Expanded RAS mutational analysis revealed that patients with RAS wt mCRC had better outcomes (BORR = 64.7%; median PFS = 13.0 months; median OS = 28.4 months). The data suggest that ETS and DpR may be associated with survival outcomes in the RAS wt population. Although this study was not designed to formally assess differences in outcome between treatment subgroups, efficacy results appeared similar for patients treated with FOLFOX and FOLFIRI. There were no new safety findings; in particular, grade 3/4 skin reactions were within clinical expectations. CONCLUSION: The observed activity and safety profile is similar to that reported in prior first-line pivotal studies involving weekly cetuximab, suggesting once-every-2-weeks cetuximab is effective and tolerable as first-line therapy and may represent an alternative to weekly administration.

Prospective international cohort study demonstrates inability of interim PET to predict treatment failure in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

UNLABELLED: The International Atomic Energy Agency sponsored a large, multinational, prospective study to further define PET for risk stratification of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and to test the hypothesis that international biological diversity or diversity of healthcare systems may influence the kinetics of treatment response as assessed by interim PET (I-PET). METHODS: Cancer centers in Brazil, Chile, Hungary, India, Italy, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand followed a common protocol based on treatment with R-CHOP (cyclophosphamide, hydroxyadriamycin, vincristine, prednisolone with rituximab), with I-PET after 2-3 cycles of chemotherapy and at the end of chemotherapy scored visually. RESULTS: Two-year survivals for all 327 patients (median follow-up, 35 mo) were 79% (95% confidence interval [CI], 74%-83%) for event-free survival (EFS) and 86% (95% CI, 81%-89%) for overall survival (OS). Two hundred ten patients (64%) were I-PET-negative, and 117 (36%) were I-PET-positive. Two-year EFS was 90% (95% CI, 85%-93%) for I-PET-negative and 58% (95% CI, 48%-66%) for I-PET-positive, with a hazard ratio of 5.31 (95% CI, 3.29-8.56). Two-year OS was 93% (95% CI, 88%-96%) for I-PET-negative and 72% (95% CI, 63%-80%) for I-PET-positive, with a hazard ratio of 3.86 (95% CI, 2.12-7.03). On sequential monitoring, 192 of 312 (62%) patients had complete response at both I-PET and end-of-chemotherapy PET, with an EFS of 97% (95% CI, 92%-98%); 110 of these with favorable clinical indicators had an EFS of 98% (95% CI, 92%-100%). In contrast, the 107 I-PET-positive cases segregated into 2 groups: 58 (54%) achieved PET-negative complete remission at the end of chemotherapy (EFS, 86%; 95% CI, 73%-93%); 46% remained PET-positive (EFS, 35%; 95% CI, 22%-48%). Heterogeneity analysis found no significant difference between countries for outcomes stratified by I-PET. CONCLUSION: This large international cohort delivers 3 novel findings: treatment response assessed by I-PET is comparable across disparate healthcare systems, secondly a negative I-PET findings together with good clinical status identifies a group with an EFS of 98%, and thirdly a single I-PET scan does not differentiate chemoresistant lymphoma from complete response and cannot be used to guide risk-adapted therapy.

Combined PET and biopsy evidence of marrow involvement improves prognostic prediction in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

UNLABELLED: Bone marrow is an important extranodal site in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and marrow histology has been incorporated into the new National Comprehensive Cancer Network international prognostic index. Marrow involvement demonstrated histologically confers poor prognosis but is identified by staging PET in more cases. How information from staging PET and biopsy should be combined to optimize outcome prediction remains unclear. METHODS: The International Atomic Energy Agency sponsored a prospective international cohort study to better define the use of PET in DLBCL. As a planned subsidiary analysis, we examined the interplay of marrow involvement identified by PET and biopsy on clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Eight countries contributed 327 cases with a median follow-up of 35 mo. The 2-y outcomes of cases with no evidence of marrow involvement (n = 231) were 81% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76%-86%) for event-free survival (EFS) and 88% (83%-91%) for overall survival (OS); cases identified only on PET (n = 61), 81% (69%-89%) for EFS and 88% (77%-94%) for OS; cases indentified only on biopsy (n = 10), 80% (41%-95%) for EFS and 100% for OS; or cases identified by both PET and biopsy (n = 25), 45% (25%-64%) for EFS and 55% (32%-73%) for OS. The hazard ratios for PET-negative/biopsy-negative cases versus PET-positive/biopsy-positive cases were 2.67 (95% CI, 1.48-4.79) for EFS and 3.94 (1.93-8.06) for OS. CONCLUSION: This large study demonstrates that positive iliac crest biopsy histology only confers poor prognosis for patients who also have abnormal marrow (18)F-FDG uptake identified on the staging PET scan. Abnormal (18)F-FDG uptake in marrow, when iliac crest biopsy histology is normal, has no adverse effect on outcomes.