Adjuvant radiotherapy of endometrial cancer: role of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in treatment modulation

Objective: Residual disease after surgery is related to an unfavorable prognosis in patients with endometrial cancer (EC). An early diagnosis and treatment of this condition could improve patients’ outcome. Aim of this study was to define the role of postoperative 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (18F-FDG-PET/CT) in patients with high risk of residual disease after EC surgery. Methods: Patients operated for EC, with one or more risk factors, who underwent 18F-FDG-PET/CT before adjuvant treatment were included in this observational study. The primary endpoint was the rate of patients in whom 18F-FDG-PET/CT changed the treatment strategy and/or the radiotherapy (RT) planning. Results: Our analysis included 58 patients (median age: 67.5 years, range: 48.0–86.0) with the following risk factors: lymphadenectomy not performed (26 patients; 44.8%), inadequate lymphadenectomy (23 patients; 39.7%), and high risk of residual disease due to advanced stage (nine patients; 15.5%). Postoperative 18F-FDG-PET/CT imaging was positive in 18 patients (31%) in the following sites: pelvic extra-nodal disease (one patient), pelvic and/or paraaortic lymph nodes (12 patients), distant metastases (one patient), or combination of previous sites (four patients). Based on these results, the adjuvant therapeutic strategy was changed in five patients, three of whom were referred to chemotherapy alone due to distant metastases and two of whom were referred to nodal-directed treatment due to lymph node metastases (lymphadenectomy and pelvic chemoradiation plus boost, respectively). Furthermore, based on the 18F-FDG-PET/CT results, the RT plan was modified in 13 patients (addition of a boost on residual pelvic/abdominal disease in 12 and target modification in one, respectively). Therefore, based on postoperative 18F-FDG-PET/CT findings, the therapeutic strategy and the RT plan were changed in 5 patients (8.6%) and 13 patients (22.4%), respectively. Conclusion: In this analysis, the adjuvant treatment was modified after post-operative 18F-FDG-PET/CT in about one third of patients. Further studies are needed to better define the risk factors (or their combinations) correlated with higher probability of residual disease after radical hysterectomy-adnexectomy for EC.

Endometrial cancer; Postoperative treatment; 18F-FDG-PET/CT; Radiotherapy; Concurrent chemoradiation; Brachytherapy

[1] McAlpine JN, Temkin SM, Mackay HJ. Endometrial cancer: not your grandmother’s cancer. Cancer. 2016; 122: 2787–2798.

[2] Ferlay J, Ervik M, Lam F, Colombet M, Mery L, Piñeros M, et al. Global Cancer Observatory: Cancer Today. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer. 2018. Available at: https://gco.iarc.fr/today (Accessed: 18 March 2019).

[3] National Cancer Institute. SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Endometrial Cancer. 2020. Available at: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/ht ml/corp.html (Accessed: 18 March 2020).

[4] Lewin SN, Herzog TJ, Medel NIB, Deutsch I, Burke WM, Sun X, et al. Comparative Performance of the 2009 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetricsʼ Staging System for Uterine Corpus Cancer. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2010; 116: 1141–1149.

[5] Lin MY, Dobrotwir A, McNally O, Abu‐Rustum NR, Narayan K. Role of imaging in the routine management of endometrial cancer. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2018; 143: 109–117.

[6] Colombo N, Creutzberg C, Amant F, Bosse T, González-Martín A, Ledermann J, et al. ESMO–ESGO–ESTRO consensus conference on endometrial cancer: Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology. 2016; 27: 16–41.

[7] Erdemoğlu E, Çerçi SS, Erdemoğlu E, Yalçın Y, Tatar B. Role of positron emission tomography-computed tomography in endometrial cancer. Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2017; 14: 203–209.

[8] National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Uterine Neoplasms Version 1.2020. 2019. Available at: https://www.nccn.org/profe ssionals/physician_gls/pdf/uterine.pdf (Accessed: 3 July 2020).

[9] Colombo N, Preti E, Landoni F, Carinelli S, Colombo A, Marini C, et al. Endometrial cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology. 2013; 24: vi33–vi38.

[10] Grégoire V, Mackie TR. State of the art on dose prescription, reporting and recording in Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (ICRU report no. 83). Cancer/RadiothéRapie. 2011; 15: 555–559.

[11] Small W, Beriwal S, Demanes DJ, Dusenbery KE, Eifel P, Erickson B, et al. American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for adjuvant vaginal cuff brachytherapy after hysterectomy. Brachytherapy. 2012; 11: 58–67.

[12] Palma DA, Olson R, Harrow S, Gaede S, Louie AV, Haasbeek C, et al. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus standard of care palliative treatment in patients with oligometastatic cancers (SABR-COMET): a randomised, phase 2, open-label trial. The Lancet. 2019; 393: 2051–2058.

[13] Simcock B, Narayan K, Drummond E, Bernshaw D, Wells E, Hicks RJ. The Role of Positron Emission Tomogra-phy/Computed Tomography in Planning Radiotherapy in Endometrial Cancer. International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer. 2015; 25: 645–649.

[14] Ozcan Kara P, Kara T, Kaya B, Gedik GK, Sari O. The value of FDG-PET/CT in the post-treatment evaluation of endometrial carcinoma: a comparison of PET/CT findings with conventional imaging and CA 125 as a tumour marker. Revista EspañOla De Medicina Nuclear E Imagen Molecular. 2012; 31: 257–260.

[15] Sharma P, Kumar R, Singh H, Jeph S, Sharma DN, Bal C, et al. Carcinoma Endometrium. Clinical Nuclear Medicine. 2012; 37: 649–655.

[16] Kadkhodayan S, Shahriari S, Treglia G, Yousefi Z, Sadeghi R. Accuracy of 18-F-FDG PET imaging in the follow up of endometrial cancer patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Gynecologic Oncology. 2013; 128: 397–404.

[17] Bollineni VR, Ytre-Hauge S, Bollineni-Balabay O, Salvesen HB, Haldorsen IS. High Diagnostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Endometrial Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2016; 57: 879–885.

[18] Crivellaro C, Signorelli M, Guerra L, De Ponti E, Pirovano C, Fruscio R, et al. Tailoring systematic lymphadenectomy in high-risk clinical early stage endometrial cancer: the role of 18F-FDG PET/CT. Gynecologic Oncology. 2013; 130: 306–311.

[19] Antonsen SL, Jensen LN, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Costa J, Tabor A, et al. MRI, PET/CT and ultrasound in the preoperative staging of endometrial cancer — a multicenter prospective comparative study. Gynecologic Oncology. 2013; 128: 300–308.

[20] Kitajima K, Suzuki K, Senda M, Kita M, Nakamoto Y, Sakamoto S, et al. Preoperative nodal staging of uterine cancer: is contrast-enhanced PET/CT more accurate than non-enhanced PET/CT or enhanced CT alone? Annals of Nuclear Medicine. 2011; 25: 511–519.