SUVmax is the most frequently evaluated PET/CT parameter in patients with lung cancer. In this study, as in previous studies (
13-
15), neither SUVmax nor SUVmean was associated with tumor behavior (lymphatic or distant metastasis) or patient survival. Some studies have also reported no association between survival of NSCLC patients and MTV or TLG values (
21). Our study showed that while MTV and TLG were not associated with tumor behavior, they might play a role in predicting the survival of NSCLC patients, as shown in some other studies (
22-
24). In patients with SCC and those with lymph node metastasis, no associations between PET variables and survival could be established. By contrast, in ACA patients, PET/CT-derived parameters of the primary tumor were associated with survival. Specifically, in patients with ACA or lymph node or distant metastasis, higher MTV and lower TLG values were associated with shorter survival, and vice versa.
Predicting survival in lung cancer patients is challenging, as many factors are likely to influence survival. The relationship between MTV and TLG values and survival in patients with ACA or lymph node or distant metastasis, and why neither parameter is relevant for other NSCLC patients, remains to be elucidated. Although the risk of death from lung cancer would be expected to increase as the volume of the tumor increases, survival in patients with early-stage tumors is significantly better regardless of tumor volume. Whether a volumetric parameter is a predictor of survival in these patients remains to be addressed in studies with long-term follow-up. Moreover, given the highly effective treatment modalities for early-stage disease, it will be difficult to distinguish the predictive ability of a volumetric variable.
In our study, MTV was not associated with survival, but this may have been due to the small number of patients with early-stage disease, the effective treatment of these patients, and the short follow-up period. For patients with lymphatic and distant metastases, however, tumor volume has almost no effect on survival. Tumor volume can be easily determined using CT, but in patients with lymphatic or distant metastases, tumor volume does not change the stage –and survival– of the patients. Nonetheless, among our patients with advanced-TNM-stage NSCLC, survival decreased as MTV increased. This result suggests that the addition of metabolic information to volumetric information on the primary tumor could improve predictions of patient survival, even in patients with lymph node or distant metastasis.
Among NSCLC patients, metastasis occurs later in those with SCC, despite the rapid growth of these tumors, than in patients with ACA (
25). In SCC tumors, volume may not indicate the aggressiveness of the tumor, unlike an increase in the volume of ACA tumors. Thus, for patients with ACA type NSCLC, a high MTV may be associated with worse survival.
Although TLG includes metabolic as well as volumetric information, its utility in predicting the survival of lung cancer patients is unclear. Our study suggests that determining TLG can provide information on survival but only in patients with ACA or distant metastasis.
One of the variables affecting the TLG value is the MTV value, and there is a good correlation between them. The opposite effects of MTV and TLG on patient survival in this study are therefore difficult to interpret. Survival was found to worsen as MTV levels increased and TLG levels decreased. The inverse relationship between these two parameters suggests a role for SUVmean, the other variable in the TLG calculation. Thus, a decrease in the TLG level with an increasing MTV implies a lower SUVmean. However, the association between the SUV mean value alone and survival was not significant. This suggests that SUVmean is heterogeneously associated with survival. According to our study, if there is no increase in the SUV mean as the MTV increases, survival will be worse. It may therefore be the case that the systemic effects of tumor cells are more important than their local activity, with negative consequences for survival. For patients with a primary tumor characterized by a high SUVmean and a small MTV, the higher local activity and fewer systemic effects of the tumor may improve survival.
This study had several limitations. First, the ROI in the calculation of MTV and TLG during FDG-PET examination was determined manually, which may lead to differences in the results depending on the operator. Second, both the retrospective nature of the study and the small size of the study population may have led to erroneous results. Similarly, the small number of patients with early-stage NSCLC reduced the accuracy of the analysis. A prospective study with more patients is needed to verify our results.
In conclusion, among the PET/CT-derived parameters, MTV and TLG can be used to predict the survival of patients with NSCLC. Specifically, in patients with ACA or lymphatic or distant metastasis, a higher MTV and lower TLG may be associated with shorter survival.