001     132432
005     20240229105015.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1007/s00259-017-3870-6
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a pmid:29124281
|2 pmid
024 7 _ |a 0340-6997
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1432-105X
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1619-7070
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a 1619-7089
|2 ISSN
024 7 _ |a altmetric:28768580
|2 altmetric
037 _ _ |a DKFZ-2018-00120
041 _ _ |a eng
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Anwar, Hoda
|0 0000-0002-4071-5217
|b 0
|e First author
245 _ _ |a Absolute number of new lesions on18F-FDG PET/CT is more predictive of clinical response than SUV changes in metastatic melanoma patients receiving ipilimumab.
260 _ _ |a Heidelberg [u.a.]
|c 2018
|b Springer-Verl.
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1521456231_12159
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
520 _ _ |a Evaluation of response to immunotherapy is a matter of debate. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the response of metastatic melanoma to treatment with ipilimumab by means of18F-FDG PET/CT, using the patients' clinical response as reference.The final cohort included in the analyses consisted of 41 patients with metastatic melanoma who underwent18F-FDG PET/CT before and after administration of ipilimumab. After determination of the best clinical response, the PET/CT scans were reviewed and a separate independent analysis was performed, based on the number and functional size of newly emerged18F-FDG-avid lesions, as well as on the SUV changes after therapy.The median observation time of the patients after therapy was 21.4 months (range 6.3-41.9 months). Based on their clinical response, patients were dichotomized into those with clinical benefit (CB) and those without CB (No-CB). The CB group (31 patients) included those with stable disease, partial remission and complete remission, and the No-CB group (10 patients) included those with progressive disease. The application of a threshold of four newly emerged18F-FDG-avid lesions on the posttherapy PET/CT scan led to a sensitivity (correctly predicting CB) of 84% and a specificity (correctly predicting No-CB) of 100%. This cut-off was lower for lesions with larger functional diameters (three new lesions larger than 1.0 cm and two new lesions larger than 1.5 cm). SUV changes after therapy did not correlate with clinical response. Based on these findings, we developed criteria for predicting clinical response to immunotherapy by means of18F-FDG PET/CT (PET Response Evaluation Criteria for Immunotherapy, PERCIMT).Our results show that a cut-off of four newly emerged18F-FDG-avid lesions on posttherapy PET/CT gives a reliable indication of treatment failure in patients under ipilimumab treatment. Moreover, the functional size of the new lesions plays an important role in predicting the clinical response. Validation of these results in larger cohorts of patients is warranted.
536 _ _ |a 315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|c POF3-315
|f POF III
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to CrossRef, PubMed,
700 1 _ |a Sachpekidis, Christos
|0 P:(DE-He78)69d2d5247c019c2a2075502dc11bf0b2
|b 1
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Winkler, Julia
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Kopp-Schneider, Annette
|0 P:(DE-He78)bb6a7a70f976eb8df1769944bf913596
|b 3
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Haberkorn, Uwe
|0 P:(DE-He78)13a0afba029f5f64dc18b25ef7499558
|b 4
|u dkfz
700 1 _ |a Hassel, Jessica C
|b 5
700 1 _ |a Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss, Antonia
|0 P:(DE-He78)b2df3652dfa3e19d5e96dfc53f44a992
|b 6
|e Last author
|u dkfz
773 _ _ |a 10.1007/s00259-017-3870-6
|g Vol. 45, no. 3, p. 376 - 383
|0 PERI:(DE-600)2098375-X
|n 3
|p 376 - 383
|t European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging
|v 45
|y 2018
|x 1619-7089
909 C O |o oai:inrepo02.dkfz.de:132432
|p VDB
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 0
|6 0000-0002-4071-5217
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 1
|6 P:(DE-He78)69d2d5247c019c2a2075502dc11bf0b2
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 3
|6 P:(DE-He78)bb6a7a70f976eb8df1769944bf913596
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 4
|6 P:(DE-He78)13a0afba029f5f64dc18b25ef7499558
910 1 _ |a Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
|0 I:(DE-588b)2036810-0
|k DKFZ
|b 6
|6 P:(DE-He78)b2df3652dfa3e19d5e96dfc53f44a992
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|l Krebsforschung
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-310
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF3-300
|v Imaging and radiooncology
|x 0
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF3
|b Gesundheit
914 1 _ |y 2018
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0310
|2 StatID
|b NCBI Molecular Biology Database
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0600
|2 StatID
|b Ebsco Academic Search
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b ASC
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b EUR J NUCL MED MOL I : 2015
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Thomson Reuters Master Journal List
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0110
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0111
|2 StatID
|b Science Citation Index Expanded
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1110
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Clinical Medicine
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)1030
|2 StatID
|b Current Contents - Life Sciences
915 _ _ |a IF >= 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9905
|2 StatID
|b EUR J NUCL MED MOL I : 2015
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)E060-20160331
|k E060
|l KKE Nuklearmedizin
|x 0
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331
|k C060
|l Biostatistik
|x 1
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)E060-20160331
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-He78)C060-20160331
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED


LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21