Abstract
This chapter highlights the role of FDG PET/CT in primary hepatic malignancies and hepatic metastases.
Access provided by CONRICYT-eBooks. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Malignancies of the liver can be primary which include hepatocellular cancers (HCC) predominantly in adults and hepatoblastomas seen in children or secondaries—commonest from colorectal primary.
This article shall discuss the utility of FDG PET/CT in management of primary hepatic tumors and metastatic disease from colorectal malignancies.
6.1 Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Hepatocellular carcinoma is a disease which frequently occurs in the patients with chronic liver disease – secondary to injury caused by either hepatitis or alcoholic intake.
6.1.1 Staging
The outcome of these tumors depends on the stage of the disease at presentation; larger tumors and metastatic disease have poorer outcomes. Staging of HCC is generally done using a triple-phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the abdominal region for local evaluation, and metastatic work-up includes bone scan and a CT chest.
Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG PET/CT) extrapolates the Warburg effect, increasing glucose utilization by malignant tissue which is identified by overexpression of GLUT receptor on tumor sites. However, HCC cells show varied glucose receptor expression and hence the uptake of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) is variable [1,2,3].
The sensitivity of FDG PET or PET/CT for identifying primary HCC ranges from 50 to 65% as seen in various studies [2, 4, 5] (Figs. 6.1 and 6.2).
HCC with metastases have a poor prognosis with limited treatment options, while locally advanced HCC in the absence of extrahepatic spread could be offered aggressive local therapies; thus, accurate staging helps triage patients. FDG PET has been useful in the detection of distant metastases of HCC and fares better than conventional imaging modalities for detection of bony involvement while showing similar detection rates for lung and nodal disease [6, 7] (Fig. 6.3).
A systemic review and meta-analysis evaluating FDG PET or PET/CT in extrahepatic metastases and recurrent disease included eight studies and showed pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio of FDG PET (PET/CT) in the detection of extrahepatic metastases at 76.6% (95% CI, 68.7–83.3%), 98.0% (95% CI, 92.8–99.8%), 14.68 (95% CI, 5.5–39.14), and 0.28 (95% CI, 0.20–0.40), respectively [8].
Few studies which tried to evaluate its role as a biologic marker identified that tumors with a higher density of glucose receptors tend to be aggressive; hence, tumors which show greater FDG uptake could represent a disease with a bad biology [3, 9].
Tumors with no FDG uptake have better outcomes [10], while among FDG-avid tumors, those with higher FDG uptake show poor outcomes as compared with tumors with lower FDG concentrations. Tumors with a greater FDG concentration also tend to show a shorter doubling time and present with higher stage of disease [11,12,13].
6.1.2 Treatment Response Assessment
Local targeted treatment (LRT) for HCC exploits the pathophysiology of dual blood supply of hepatic tumors. It blocks the predominant arterial blood supply leading to reduction in blood flow and cell death via either ischemia, thermal/coagulation, or radiation effect which do not result in tumor shrinkage [14, 15], but show necrosis and reduction in the enhancement pattern which are not accounted in RECIST 1 or RECIST 1.1 criteria. The newer guidelines have incorporated the enhancement criteria (mRECIST) and necrotic parameters in the response assessment of HCC [16,17,18].
Identifying enhancement features could be difficult due to benign posttreatment inflammatory changes, or a heterogeneous nature of the tumor environment and functional imaging like diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance (DWMRI) or FDG PET/CT is recommended.
Response assessment with FDG PET/CT is done either by visual assessment of the tumor site in the pre- and post-therapy scans in comparison with blood pool uptakes or by calculating the reduction of FDG uptake at the tumor site using various semiquantitative or quantitative methods, e.g., ratio of tumor SUV to the liver or mediastinum or SUV max. Studies show better survival and event-free rates in patients who depict significant reduction in the uptakes at the tumor site [19, 20]. When compared to conventional imaging methods like CECT, FDG PET/CT showed a higher sensitivity in identifying residual viable tissue which is generally seen as a focal eccentric uptake in the periphery [21, 22] (Fig. 6.4).
In a bid to standardize the response assessment of solid tumors using FDG PET/CT, the PERCIST criteria was suggested by Wahl et al., which is adapted from the anatomical-based RECIST 1.1 principle and measures the FDG standard uptake (lean) in up to five index lesions (up to two lesions per organ) with highest FDG uptake. The response is expressed as percentage change in peak standard uptake of sum of lesions of baseline and posttreatment scans [23] (Table 6.1).
The ideal time to assess response would be at 3 months post therapy allowing for posttreatment-related changes to settle which could cause false-positive or equivocal readings.
Radiofrequency ablation is a localized treatment option for smaller tumors and those away from vessels. FDG PET/CT for this indication should be performed prior to initiation of inflammatory changes, i.e., within 6–12 h of procedure to avoid masking of the residual disease seen as a focal uptake in the periphery [25] (Fig. 6.5).
6.1.3 Utility of PET/CT in Evaluating Radioembolization of HCC
Post therapy scans in patients treated with 90 Yttrium tracers are evaluated with a bremsstrahlung imaging using the SPECT/CT scanner. Positron emissions from the Y90 radioisotope have been utilized to obtain an immediate post therapy PET/CT study. The advantage of this modality is the clear demarcation of region of radioisotope delivery and dosimetry to calculate actual dose delivered (Fig. 6.6). The presence of small extravasation of tracer into stomach or elsewhere is also identified which could have been missed on a pretreatment shunt evaluation dummy scan with colloids [26,27,28].
The posttreatment scan allows calculation of dose delivered to tumor which is a predictor of tumor response [29, 30] and to the normal liver which will help in identifying the dose leading to hepatic dysfunction.
6.1.4 Disease Recurrence
Early identification of local disease recurrence can be offered salvage treatment, and hence it is useful to identify extent of disease spread at restaging. FDG PET/CT has shown to be a helpful mechanism to identify sites of local or distant recurrence when a clinical suspicion is raised. FDG PET/CT showed an incremental value in patients with elevated tumor marker and negative imaging on CIMs and also better specificity and accuracy [31, 32] (Fig. 6.7).
A meta-analysis of eight studies discussed earlier showed a pooled estimate of sensitivity, specificity, and LR+ and LR− of FDG PET (PET/CT) in the detection of recurrent HCC to be 81.7% (95% CI, 71.6–89.4%), 88.9% (95% CI, 70.8–97.6%), 4.72 (95% CI, 2.21–10.07), and 0.19 (95% CI, 0.10–0.35), respectively [8].
6.2 Hepatoblastomas
Hepatoblastomas are glycogen-rich tumors and hence would have a high glucose receptor density leading to increased FDG uptake making it a suitable agent for staging these tumors; however, no significant literature is available pertaining to this [33]. Few studies which evaluated its role in restaging hepatoblastomas have found it to be a very specific test [34] and suggest an incremental value over conventional imaging (CT and MRI) in early recurrences [35] (Fig. 6.8).
Conclusion
Available literature suggests FDG PET/CT to be a prognostic factor while staging HCC and a good modality for assessing response to local therapies in intermediate HCC. There is not enough evidence to predict the role in hepatoblastomas.
Key Points
-
The sensitivity of FDG PET or PET/CT for identifying primary HCC ranges from 50 to 65% as seen in various studies.
-
FDG PET has been useful in the detection of distant metastases of HCC.
-
Tumors with no FDG uptake have better outcomes, while among FDG-avid tumors, those with higher FDG uptake show poor outcomes.
-
FDG PET/CT showed a higher sensitivity in identifying residual viable tissue which is generally seen as a focal eccentric uptake in the periphery.
-
The ideal time to assess response would be at 3 months post therapy allowing for posttreatment-related changes to settle which could cause false-positive or equivocal readings.
-
FDG PET/CT is useful to identify sites of local or distant recurrence.
-
FDG PET/CT showed an incremental value in patients with elevated tumor marker and negative imaging.
References
Lee JD, Yang WI, Park YN, et al. Different glucose uptake and glycolytic mechanisms between hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic mass forming cholangiocarcinoma with increased (18) F-FDG uptake. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1753–9.
Khan MA, Combs CS, Brunt EM, et al. Positron emission tomography scanning in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2000;32:792–7.
Torizuka T, Tamaki N, Inokuma T, et al. In vivo assessment of glucose metabolism in hepatocellular carcinoma with FDG-PET. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1811–7.
Ho CL, SC Y, Yeung DW. 11C-acetate PET imaging in hepatocellular carcinoma and other liver masses. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:213–21.
Wudel LJ Jr, Delbeke D, Morris D, et al. The role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Am Surg. 2003;69:117–24. discussion 124–126
Nagaoka S, Itano S, Ishibashi M, Torimura T, Baba K, Akiyoshi J, Kurogi J, Matsugaki S, Inoue K, Tajiri N, Takada A, Ando E, Kuromatsu R, Kaida H, Kurogi M, Koga H, Kumashiro R, Hayabuchi N, Kojiro M, Sata M. Value of fusing PET plus CT images in hepatocellular carcinoma and combined hepatocellular and cholangiocarcinoma patients with extrahepatic metastases: preliminary findings. Liver Int. 2006;26(7):781–8.
Kawaoka T, Aikata H, Takaki S, et al. FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of extrahepatic metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Res. 2009;39:134–42.
Lin CY, Chen JH, Liang JA, Lin CC, Jeng LB, Kao CH. 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT for detecting extrahepatic metastases or recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(9):2417–22.
Kwee TC, Basu S, Saboury B, et al. A new dimension of FDG-PET interpretation: assessment of tumor biology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1158–70.
Park JW, Kim JH, Kim SK, et al. A prospective evaluation of 18F-FDG and 11Cacetate PET/CT for detection of primary and metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1912–21.
Kong YH, Han CJ, Lee SD, et al. Positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose is useful for predicting the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (in Korean). Korean J Hepatol. 2004;10:279–87.
Shiomi S, Nishiguchi S, Ishizu H, et al. Usefulness of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose for predicting outcome in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:1877–80.
Cho E, Jun CH, Kim BS, Son DJ, Choi WS, Choi SK. 18F-FDG PET CT as a prognostic factor in hepatocellular carcinoma. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2015;26(4):344–50.
Dhanasekaran R, Limaye A, Cabrera R. Hepatocellular carcinoma: Current trends in worldwide epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, and therapeutics. Hepat Med. 2012;4:19–37.
Arora A, Kumar A. Treatment response evaluation and follow-up in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2014;4:S126–9.
Lencioni R, Llovet JM. Modified RECIST (mRECIST) assessment for hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Liver Dis. 2010;30:52–60.
Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, et al. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver. J Hepatol. 2001;35:421–30.
Kallini JR, Miller FH, Gabr A, Salem R, Lewandowski RJ. Hepatic imaging following intra-arterial embolotherapy. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016;41(4):600–16. doi:10.1007/s00261–016–0639-5. Review. PubMed
Song MJ, Bae SH, Lee SW, Song DS, Kim HY, IeR Y, Choi JI, Lee YJ, Chun HJ, Lee HG, Choi JY, Yoon SK. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT predicts tumour progression after transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(6):865–73.
Ma W, Jia J, Wang S, et al. The Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE). Theranostics. 2014;4(7):736–44. doi:10.7150/thno.8725.
Kim HO, Kim JS, Shin YM, et al. Evaluation of metabolic characteristics and viability of lipiodolized hepatocellular carcinomas using 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1849–56.
Song HJ, Cheng JY, SL H, et al. Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting viable tumour and predicting prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma after TACE. Clin Radiol. 2014;70(2):128–37.
Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(suppl 1):122S–50S.
Prajapati HJ, Spivey JR, Hanish SI, El-Rayes BF, Kauh JS, Chen Z, Kim HS. mRECIST and EASL responses at early time point by contrast-enhanced dynamic MRI predict survival in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated by doxorubicin drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization (DEB TACE). Ann Oncol. 2012;00:1–9.
Purandare NC, Rangarajan V, Shah SA, Sharma AR, Kulkarni SS, Kulkarni AV, Dua SG. Therapeutic response to radiofrequency ablation of neoplastic lesions: FDG PET/CT findings. Radiographics. 2011;31(1):201–13.
Elschot M, Vermolen BJ, Lam MGEH, et al. Quantitative comparison of PET and bremsstrahlung SPECT for imaging the in vivo yttrium-90 microsphere distribution after liver radioembolization. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):55742.
Zade AA, Rangarajan V, Purandare NC, et al. 90Y microsphere therapy: does 90Y PET/CT imaging obviate the need for 90Y bremsstrahlung SPECT/CT imaging? Nucl Med Commun. 2013;34:1090–6.
Wright C, Binzel K, Zhang J, Wuthrick E, Tung C-h, Knopp M. Post-radioembolization assessment of intrahepatic yttrium-90 microsphere biodistribution using next-generation digital PET/CT and comparison to current pre/post-radioembolization SPECT/CT methodologies. J Nucl Med. 2016;57(2):197.
D’Arienzo M, Chiaramida P, Chiacchiararelli L, et al. 90Y PET-based dosimetry after selective internal radiotherapy treatments. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:633–40.
Kao YH, Steinberg JD, Tay YS, et al. Post-radioembolization yttrium-90 PET/CT: part 2—dose-response and tumor predictive dosimetry for resin microspheres. EJNMMI Res. 2013;3:57.
Chen YK, Hsieh DS, Liao CS, et al. Utility of FDG-PET for investigating unexplained serum AFP elevation in patients with suspected hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence. Anticancer Res. 2005;25:4719–25.
Han AR, Gwak GY, Choi MS, et al. The clinical value of 18F-FDG PET/CT for investigating unexplained serum AFP elevation following interventional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatogastroenterology. 2009;56:1111–6.
Shiojiri N. Enzymo- and immunocytochemical analyses of the differentiation of liver cells in the prenatal mouse. J Embryol Exp Morphol. 1981;62:139–52.
Philip I, Shun A, McCowage G, Howman-Giles R. Positron emission tomography in recurrent hepatoblastoma. Pediatr Surg Int. 2005;21(5):341–5.
Cistaro A, Treglia G, Pagano M, et al. A comparison between 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging and biological and radiological findings in restaging of hepatoblastoma patients. Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:709037.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shah, S., Purandare, N., Puranik, A., Agrawal, A., Rangarajan, V. (2018). Hepatic Malignancies and FDG PET/CT. In: Purandare, N., Shah, S. (eds) PET/CT in Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Malignancies. Clinicians’ Guides to Radionuclide Hybrid Imaging(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60507-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60507-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60506-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60507-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)