Table 2.
Comparison of morphological and metabolic indices on FDG PET between HPV+ and HPV− OPCCs (median and range).
| HPV+ | HPV− | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | |||
| SUVmax | 10.4 (2.9 – 21.6) | 12.4 (2.7 – 21.5) | p=0.007 |
| SUVmean | 5.1 (1.9 – 10.5) | 6.4 (1.9 – 13.0) | p = 0.01 |
| SUVpeak | 9.2 (3.9 – 18.1) | 11.9 (5.8 – 19.5) | p = 0.01 |
| MTVedge (cm3) | 8.5 (0.5 – 164.5) | 21.9 (1.9 – 193.1) | p = 0.002 |
| TLGedge (cm3) | 41.5 (1.3 – 635.9) |
165. 9 (3.6 – 1414.9) | p = 0.001 |
| MTVthreshold (cm3) | 3.9 (0.4 – 34.7) | 9.4 (0.9 – 68.4) | p = 0.002 |
| TLGthreshold (cm3) | 26.6 (1.1 – 452.0) |
96.4 (1.8 – 757.1) | p = 0.0009 |
| RECISTlong (cm) | 2.7 (1.0 – 7.4) | 3.7 (1.5 – 8.8) | p=0.002 |
| HI | 1.8 (1.3 – 3.2) | 1.9 (1.5 – 2.8) | p = 0.07 |
| MI | 3.1 (0.5 – 22.3) | 6.0 (1.2 – 21.9) | P = 0.002 |
| Nodal | |||
| Highest SUVmax | 8.0 (3.2 – 22.9) | 8.5 (3.0 – 16.6) | p = 0.9 |
| Highest SUVmean | 4.0 (1.4 – 10.7) | 4.2 (1.8 – 8.7) | p =1.0 |
| Highest SUVpeak | 6.8 (2.8 – 30.4) | 6.4 (4.4 – 13.2) | p =0.2 |
| Highest MTVedge (cm3) | 10.0 (0.6 – 148.1) | 4.5 (0.9 – 115.7) | p =0.05 |
| Sum MTVedge (cm3) | 13.5 (0.6 – 188.5) | 5.9 (0.9 – 170.8) | p =0.09 |
| Highest RECISTlong (cm) | 2.8 (1.4 – 7.8) | 2.0 (1.4 – 7.4) | p =0.04 |
| Highest TLGedge | 39.4 (1.4 – 807.1) |
20.9 (1.7 – 565.0) | p =0.1 |
| Sum TLGedge | 43.4 (1.4 – 807.1) | 27.3 (1.7 – 836.3) | p =0.2 |
| Sum MTVthreshold | 5.1 (0.7 – 68.2) | 2.9 (0.5 – 80.3) | p =0.1 |
| Highest MTVthreshold | 3.8 (0.7 – 48.4) | 2.2 (0.5 – 55. 9) | p = 0.04 |
| Highest TLGthreshold | 21.6 (1.7 – 412.3) |
13.6 (1.1 – 360.6) | p = 0.09 |
| Sum TLGthreshold | 26.5 (1.7 – 412.3) |
18.3 (1.1 – 524.0) | p =0.2 |
| Heterogeneity Index | 2.0 (1.4 – 3.0) | 1.9 (1.5 – 3.4) | p =0.4 |
| Metabolic Index | 3.6 (0.4 – 18.9) | 2.2 (0.6 – 15.6) | p = 0.08 |
MTV: metabolic tumor volume, TLG: total lesion glycolysis, HI: heterogeneity index, MI: metabolic index