Online citations, reference lists, and bibliographies.
Please confirm you are human
(Sign Up for free to never see this)
← Back to Search

The Value Of 18FDG PET/CT Parameters, Hematological Parameters And Tumor Markers In Predicting KRAS Oncogene Mutation In Colorectal Cancer.

A. Oner, E. S. Budak, Şenay Yıldırım, F. Aydın, C. Sezer
Published 2017 · Medicine

Save to my Library
Download PDF
Analyze on Scholarcy
OBJECTIVE In this study we investigated the predictive value of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), neutrophils/lymphocytes ratio (NLR), platelets/lymphocytes ratio (PLR), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen (CA 19-9) in the prediction of KRAS gene mutation which plays an important role in the choice of treatment in colorectal cancer patients. SUBJECTS AND METHODS A total of 55 cases with untreated colorectal cancer who had undergone both PET/CT examinations for initial staging and also mutation analysis of KRAS oncogene were studied. Fluorine-18-FDG PET/CT parameters (SUVmax, MTV, TLG), hematological parameters (NLR, PLR), and tumor markers (CEA, CA 19-9) were recorded and the relationship between these parameters and KRAS oncogene mutation was evaluated using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis and multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS In 20 cases mutations in the KRAS gene were detected, while in 35 cases mutations were not observed (wild-type). ROC analysis revealed that SUVmax, MTV, TLG, NLR, PLR, and CA 19-9 could not predict mutations in KRAS oncogene (P=0.600, 0.263, 0.214, 0.057, 0.104, 0.189, respectively) although CEA value showed signi..cant difference (P=0.031) but without high value of the area under the curve (0.676). Multivariate logistic regression analysis also did not show significant association between KRAS gene mutations and SUVmax, MTV, TLG, NLR, PLR, CEA, CA 19-9 values. CONCLUSION We observed that in patients with colorectal cancers, we cannot predict KRAS gene mutations using PET/CT parameters (SUVmax, MTV, TLG), hematological parameters (NLR, PLR) or tumor marker CA 19-9. We detected a significant but not very strong association only between CEA and KRAS mutations.
This paper references
Prognostic Role of Platelet to Lymphocyte Ratio in Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
A. Templeton (2014)
Are high initial CEA and CA 19–9 levels associated with the presence of K-ras mutation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer?
F. Selcukbiricik (2013)
Mutations of APC, K-ras, and p53 are associated with specific chromosomal aberrations in colorectal adenocarcinomas.
A. Leslie (2003)
The correlation between the metabolic tumor volume and hematological parameters in patients with esophageal cancer
E. Sürücü (2015)
Measurement of clinical and sub18 clinical tumour response using F- uorodeoxyglucose and posit-ron emission tomography: review
H Young (1999)
Genetic alterations in colorectal cancer.
T. Armaghany (2012)
KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab.
A. Lièvre (2008)
Pretreatment neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio is superior to platelet/lymphocyte ratio as a predictor of long-term mortality in breast cancer patients
Basem N Azab (2013)
Relationship between 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Accumulation and KRAS/BRAF Mutations in Colorectal Cancer
K. Kawada (2012)
Prognostic role of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
A. Templeton (2014)
Cancer Antigens (CEA and CA 19-9) as Markers of Advanced Stage of Colorectal Carcinoma
Z. Vukobrat-Bijedic (2013)
Prognostic Value of PLR in Various Cancers: A Meta-Analysis
Xin Zhou (2014)
Cytokine profile and prognostic significance of high neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in colorectal cancer
Z-Y Chen (2015)
KRAS and BRAF: drug targets and predictive biomarkers
E. Vakiani (2011)
Carcinoembryonic antigen, a human tumor marker, functions as an intercellular adhesion molecule
S. Benchimol (1989)
Tumor quanti cation in clinical positron emission tomography
B Bai (2013)
From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors
R. Wahl (2009)
Pathology of colorectal cancer.
M. Ponz de Leon (2001)
Baseline total lesion glycolysis measured with (18)F-FDG PET/CT as a predictor of progression-free survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a pilot study.
S. Esfahani (2013)
Value of CT, FDG PET-CT and serum tumor markers in staging recurrent colorectal cancer
M. Çağlar (2014)
Colorectal cancer epidemiology: incidence, mortality, survival, and risk factors.
F. Haggar (2009)
Prognostic role of neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio in colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Mu-xing Li (2014)
Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group.
H. Young (1999)
Genetic Alterations in Colorectal Cancer Have Different Patterns on 18F-FDG PET/CT
S. Chen (2015)
Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, platelet/lymphocyte ratio, and mean platelet volume as potential biomarkers for early detection and monitoring of colorectal adenocarcino-ma
S Kilincalp (2015)
K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer.
C. Karapetis (2008)
Molecular pathological epidemiology of colorectal cancer in Chinese patients with KRAS and BRAF mutations
W. Li (2015)

This paper is referenced by
Semantic Scholar Logo Some data provided by SemanticScholar