Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 2;11:703995. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.703995

Table 6.

Association of overall survival with PET parameters (n=10).

Study(Author/Year of publication) Study design(P/R)a Sample size Nature of PET parameters Cutoff value HR (high vs. low) 95% CI P value Survival probabilities(overall survival) P value Quality score
Yoon (2014) (99) R 53 SUVmax-T
MTV-T2.5
MTV-T3.0
≥8.9
≥31.45 cm3
≥23.01 cm3
1.08
5.03
5.03
0.25–7.71
1.04–24.24
1.04–24.24
0.74
0.029
0.029
3
Zaghloul (2014) (100) R 70 SUVmax-T ≥8.0 0.034 (U) 3
Hsieh (2015) (101) R 174 SUVmax-T ≥8.35 3.91 1.45–10.53 0.007 5-year OS: 69.2% vs. 93.4% 0.001 4
Shen T, Tang LQ, Luo DH (2015) (102) R 194 (107: LR; 87: DM) SUVmax-T or SUVmax-M ≥8.65 (LR)
≥13.55 (DM)
4.882
2.415
1.06–22.59
0.96–6.10
0.042
0.062
4
Xiao W, Xu A, Han F (2015) (103) R 179 SUVmax-T ≥10.22 5-year OS: 66.6% vs. 87.6% <0.001 5
Yoon (2016) (104) R 97 TLG 322.7 0.29 0.11–0.79 0.02 5-year OS: 54.0% vs. 85.7% 0.003 6
Lee (2017) (108) R 53 SUVmax-T
SUVmax-N
≥13.2
≥13.4
-
7.799
-
1.51–40.40
-
0.014
-
3-year OS: 33.1% vs. 55.5%
-
0.003
5
Liu F, Xi XP, Wang H (2017) (109) R 213 PET-CT-guided dose-painting IMRT vs CT-based IMRT 0.425 0.18–1.009 0.052 3-year OS: 82.6% vs. 91.8% 0.049 5
Alessi (2019) (111) R 160 SUVmax-T
SUVmean-T
TLG
18.8
9.5
382.2
1.07
1.07
1.003
-
-
-
0.01
0.01
0.01
3
Sun XS, Liang YJ, Liu SL (2019) (113) R 253 SUVmax-T, SUVmax-N
SUVmax-M
17.0
12.7
6.9
-
1.40
1.72
-
0.95–2.06
1.13–2.78
-
0.087
0.012
3-year OS: SUVmax-T: >17 vs. ≤17: 47.7% vs. 57.3%
3-year OS: SUVmax-N: >12.7 vs. ≤12.7: 46.5% vs. 65.1%
3-year OS: SUVmax-M: >6.9 vs. ≤6.9: 49.2% vs. 65.4%
SUVmax-T: 0.48
SUVmax-N: 0.005
SUVmax-M: 0.005
5

aStudy design: prospective (P)/retrospective (R).

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; SUVmax, maximum standardized uptake value; SUVmean, mean standardized uptake value; MTV, metabolic tumor volume; TLG, total lesion glycolysis; T, primary tumor; N, lymph node; M, metastasis; LR, local recurrence.