Возможности позитронной эмиссионной томографии, совмещенной с компьютерной томографией, с ¹⁸F-ФДГ в диагностике почечно-клеточного рака

Позитронная эмиссионная томография, совмещенная с компьютерной томографией (ПЭТ/КТ), является методом оценки не только структурных, но и метаболических изменений в органах и тканях. ПЭТ/КТ с ¹⁸F-фтордезоксиглюкозой (¹⁸F-ФДГ) широко применяется в диагностике различных злокачественных опухолей, однако роль данного метода при почечно-клеточном раке (ПКР) остается неясной.

Несмотря на ограниченную эффективность в первичной и дифференциальной диагностике ПКР, ПЭТ/КТ может быть использована для определения степени злокачественности и гистологического типа опухоли. Кроме этого, по данным различных авторов, показатель стандартизированной величины поглощения (standardized uptake value, SUV) ¹⁸F-ФДГ неопластического очага при ПКР может служить независимым прогностическим фактором общей выживаемости.

ПЭТ/КТ с ¹⁸F-ФДГ широко применяется для выявления местного рецидива и метастатической диссеминации при различных неопластических процессах. Результаты многочисленных исследований подтверждают высокую эффективность ПЭТ/КТ в оценке распространенности и диагностике рецидива ПКР.

Возможность определения метаболической активности неопластических очагов с помощью ПЭТ/КТ позволяет использовать этот метод для оценки эффективности терапии ПКР, что подтверждается данными клинических исследований различных таргетных препаратов, таких как ингибиторы тирозинкиназы, ингибиторы мишени рапамицина млекопитающих и моноклональные антитела.

Таким образом, все больше данных свидетельствует в пользу того, что ПЭТ/КТ с ¹⁸F-ФДГ является полезным инструментом в диагностике ПКР.

1. Bray F., Ferlay J., Soerjomataram I. et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68(6):394-424. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21492.

2. Motzer R.J., Jonasch E., Michaelson M.D. et al. NCCN Guidelines Insights: Kidney Cancer, Version 2.2020. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2019;17(11):1278-85. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.0054.

3. Кушлинский Н.Е., Фридман М.В., Морозов А.А. и др. Современные подходы к иммунотерапии рака почки. Онкоурология 2018;14(2):54-67. DOI: 10.17650/1726-9776-2018-14-2-54-67.

4. Ricketts C.J., De Cubas A.A., Fan H. et al. The Cancer Genome Atlas Comprehensive Molecular Characterization of Renal Cell Carcinoma. Cell Rep 2018;23(1):313-26.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.075.

5. Gray R.E., Harris G.T. Renal cell carcinoma: diagnosis and management. Am Fam Physician 2019;99(3):179-84.

6. Escudier B., Porta C., Schmidinger M. et al. Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2016;27(suppl 5):v58-68. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdw328.

7. Win A.Z., Aparici C.M. Clinical effectiveness of (18)f-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in management of renal cell carcinoma: a single institution experience. World J Nucl Med 2015;14(1):36-40. DOI: 10.4103/1450-1147.150535.

8. Wiechno P., Kucharz J., Sadowska M. et al. Contemporary treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Med Oncol 2018;35(12):156. DOI: 10.1007/s12032-018-1217-1.

9. Bianchi M., Sun M., Jeldres C. et al. Distribution of metastatic sites in renal cell carcinoma: a population-based analysis. Ann Oncol 2012;23(4):973-80. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr362.

10. Gupta K., Miller J.D., Li J.Z. et al. Epidemiologic and socioeconomic burden of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): a literature review. Cancer Treat Rev 2008;34(3):193-205. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2007.12.001.

11. Murphy G., Jhaveri K. The expanding role of imaging in the management of renal cell carcinoma. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2011;11(12):1871-88. DOI: 10.1586/era.11.122.

12. Kuusk T., Grivas N., de Bruijn R., Bex A. The current management of renal cell carcinoma. Minerva Med 2017;108(4):357-69. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4806.17.05058-3.

13. Fletcher J.W., Djulbegovic B., Soares H. et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008;49:480-508. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.107.047787.

14. Sai K.K.S., Zachar Z., Bingham P.M., Mintz A. Metabolic PET Imaging in Oncology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017;209(2):270-6. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.17.18112.

15. Verma V., Choi J.I., Sawant A. et al. Use of PET and other functional imaging to guide target delineation in radiation oncology. Semin Radiat Oncol 2018;28(3):171-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.semradonc.2018.02.001.

16. Zhu A., Lee D., Shim H. Metabolic positron emission tomography imaging in cancer detection and therapy response. Semin Oncol 2011;38(1):55-69. DOI: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2010.11.012.

17. Apostolova I., Wedel F., Brenner W. Imaging of tumor metabolism using positron emission tomography (PET). Recent Results Cancer Res 2016;207:177-205. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-42118-6_8.

18. Liu Y., Ghesani N.V., Zuckier L.S. Physiology and pathophysiology of incidental findings detected on FDG-PET scintigraphy. Semin Nucl Med 2010;40:294-315. DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2010.02.002.

19. Vander Heiden M.G., Cantley L.C., Thompson C.B. Understanding the Warburg effect: the metabolic requirements of cell proliferation. Science 2009;324(5930):1029-33. DOI: 10.1126/science.1160809.

20. Kim J.W., Dang C.V. Cancer’s molecular sweet tooth and the Warburg effect. Cancer Res 2006;66(18):8927-30. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1501.

21. Wang H.Y., Ding H.J., Chen J.H. et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of [18F]FDG-PET and PET/CT in renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Imaging 2012;12(3):464-74. DOI: 10.1102/1470-7330.2012.0042.

22. Ma H., Shen G., Liu B. et al. Diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET or PET/CT in restaging renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nucl Med Commun 2017;38(2):156-63. DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000000618.

23. Ozulker T., Ozulker E, Ozbek E., OzpaSaci T. A prospective diagnostic accuracy study of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of indeterminate renal masses. Nucl Med Commun 2011;32(4):265-72. DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283442e3b.

24. Kamel E.M., Jichlinski P., Prior J.O. et al. Forced diuresis improves the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET in abdominopelvic malignancies. J Nucl Med 2006;47(11):1803-7.

25. Karivedu V., Jain A.L., Eluvathingal T.J., Sidana A. Role of positron emission tomography imaging in metabolically active renal cell carcinoma. Curr Urol Rep 2019;20(10):56. DOI: 10.1007/s11934-019-0932-2.

26. Tabei T., Nakaigawa N., Kaneta T. et al. Early assessment with 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/ computed tomography to predict shortterm outcome in clear cell renal carcinoma treated with nivolumab. BMC Cancer 2019;19(1):298. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-019-5510-y.

27. Nakaigawa N., Kondo K., Kaneta T. et al. FDG PET/CT after first molecular targeted therapy predicts survival of patients with renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2018;81(4):739-44. DOI: 10.1007/s00280-018-3542-7.

28. Kayani I., Avril N., Bomanji J. et al. Sequential FDG-PET/CT as a biomarker of response to sunitinib in metastatic clear cell renal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2011;17(18):6021-8. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-3309.

29. Elahmadawy M.A., Elazab M.S.S., Ahmed S., Salama M. Diagnostic value of F-18 FDG PET/CT for local and distant disease relapse surveillance in surgically treated RCC patients: can it aid in establishing consensus follow up strategy? Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur 2018;21(2):85-91. DOI: 10.5603/NMR.2018.0024.

30. Chen J.L., Appelbaum D.E., Kocherginsky M. et al. FDG-PET as a predictive biomarker for therapy with everolimus in metastatic renal cell cancer. Cancer Med 2013;2(4):545-52. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.102.

31. Rakheja R., Makis W., Skamene S. et al. Correlating metabolic activity on 18F-FDG PET/CT with histopathologic characteristics of osseous and soft-tissue sarcomas: a retrospective review of 136 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198(6):1409-16. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7560.

32. Watanabe Y., Suefuji H., Hirose Y. et al. 18F-FDG uptake in primary gastric malignant lymphoma correlates with glucose transporter 1 expression and histologic malignant potential. Int J Hematol 2013;97(1):43-9. DOI: 10.1007/s12185-012-1225-4.

33. Kadota K., Colovos C., Suzuki K. et al. FDG-PET SUVmax combined with IASLC/ATS/ERS histologic classification improves the prognostic stratification of patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19(11):3598-605. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2414-3.

34. Kubota K., Okasaki M., Minamimoto R. et al. Lesion-based analysis of (18)F-FDG uptake and (111)In-Pentetreotide uptake by neuroendocrine tumors. Ann Nucl Med 2014;28(10):1004-10. DOI: 10.1007/s12149-014-0900-3.

35. Heudel P., Cimarelli S., Montella A. et al. Value of PET-FDG in primary breast cancer based on histopathological and immunohistochemical prognostic factors. Int J Clin Oncol 2010;15(6):588-93. DOI: 10.1007/s10147-010-0120-3.

36. Endo M., Nakagawa K., Ohde Y. et al. Utility of 18FDG-PET for differentiating the grade of malignancy in thymic epithelial tumors. Lung Cancer 2008;61(3):350-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2008.01.003.

37. Takahashi M., Kume H., Koyama K. et al. Preoperative evaluation of renal cell carcinoma by using 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med 2015;40(12):936-40. DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000875.

38. Nakajima R., Nozaki S., Kondo T. et al. Evaluation of renal cell carcinoma histological subtype and fuhrman grade using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2017;27(11):4866-73. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-4875-z.

39. Nakajima R., Abe K., Kondo T. et al. Clinical role of early dynamic FDG-PET/CT for the evaluation of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Radiol 2016;26(6):1852-62. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-4026-3.

40. Nakhoda Z., Torigian D.A., Saboury B. et al. Assessment of the diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG-PET/CT for detection and characterization of solid renal malignancies. Hell J Nucl Med 2013;16(1):19-24. DOI: 10.1967/s002449910067.

41. Song M. Recent developments in small molecule therapies for renal cell carcinoma. Eur J Med Chem 2017;142:383-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmech.2017.08.007.

42. European Association of Urology: The compilation of the complete Guidelines should be referenced as: EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Copenhagen 2018. Available at: http://uroweb.org/guideline/renal-cell-carcinoma/.

43. Namura K., Minamimoto R., Yao M. et al. Impact of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) evaluated by 18-Fluoro-2-deoxy-d glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG-PET/CT) on survival for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a preliminary report. BMC Cancer 2010:10:667. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-10-667.

44. Pankowska V., Malkowski B., Wedrowski M. et al. FDG PET/CT as a survival prognostic factor in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Clin Exp Med 2019;19(1):143-8. DOI: 10.1007/s10238-018-0539-9.

45. Nakaigawa N., Kondo K., Tateishi U. et al. FDG PET/CT as a prognostic biomarker in the era of molecular-targeting therapies: max SUVmax predicts survival of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. BMC Cancer 2016;16:67. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2097-4.

46. Ferda J., Ferdova E., Hora M. et al. 18F-FDG-PET/CT in potentially advanced renal cell carcinoma: a role in treatment decisions and prognosis estimation. Anticancer Res 2013;33(6):2665-72.

47. Lee H., Hwang K.H., Kim S.G. et al. Can initial (18)F-FDG PET-CT imaging give information on metastasis in patients with primary renal cell carcinoma? Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014;48(2):144-52. DOI: 10.1007/s13139-013-0245-1.

48. Alongi P., Picchio M., Zattoni F. et al. Recurrent renal cell carcinoma: clinical and prognostic value of FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43(3):464-73. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-015-3159-6.

49. Fuccio C., Ceci F., Castellucci P. et al. Restaging clear cell renal carcinoma with 18F-FDG PET/CT. Clin Nucl Med 2014;39(6):e320-4. DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000382.

50. Ljungberg B., Albiges L., Abu-Ghanem Y. et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: The 2019 Update. Eur Urol 2019;75(5):799-810. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.011.

51. Escudier B., Sharma P., McDermott D.F. et al. CheckMate 025 randomized phase 3 study: outcomes by key baseline factors and prior therapy for nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol 2017;72(6):962-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.02.010.

52. Motzer R.J., Tannir N.M., McDermott D.F. et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2018;378(14):1277-90. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1712126.

53. Ito H., Kondo K., Kawahara T. et al. One-month assessment of renal cell carcinoma treated by everolimus using FDG PET/CT predicts progression-free and overall survival. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2017;79(5):855-61. DOI: 10.1007/s00280-017-3275-z.

54. Avril N., Sassen S., Schmalfeldt B. et al. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(30):7445-53. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.965.

55. Lordick F. Optimizing neoadjuvant chemotherapy through the use of early response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Recent Results Cancer Res 2012;196:201-11. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-31629-6_14.

56. Ueda S., Tsuda H., Saeki T. et al. Early metabolic response to neoadjuvant letrozole, measured by FDG PET/CT, is correlated with a decrease in the Ki67 labeling index in patients with hormone receptor-positive primary breast cancer: a pilot study. Breast Cancer 2011;18(4):299-308. DOI: 10.1007/s12282-010-0212-y.

57. Benz M.R., Czernin J., Allen-Auerbach M.S. et al. FDG-PET/CT imaging predicts histopathologic treatment responses after the initial cycle of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(8):2856-63. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-2537.

58. Nakaigawa N., Kondo K., Ueno D. et al. The acceleration of glucose accumulation in renal cell carcinoma assessed by FDG PET/CT demonstrated acquisition of resistance to tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy. BMC Cancer 2017;17(1):39. DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-3044-0.

59. Ueno D., Yao M., Tateishi U. et al. Early assessment by FDG-PET/CT of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors is predictive of disease course. BMC Cancer 2012;12:162. DOI: 10.1186/1471-240712-162.

60. Caldarella C., Muoio B., Isgro M.A. et al. The role of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in evaluating the response to tyrosine-kinase inhibitors in patients with metastatic primary renal cell carcinoma. Radiol Oncol 2014;48(3):219-27. DOI: 10.2478/raon-2013-0067.

61. Kakizoe M., Yao M., Tateishi U. et al. The early response of renal cell carcinoma to tyrosine kinase inhibitors evaluated by FDG PET/CT was not influenced by metastatic organ. BMC Cancer 2014;14:390. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-390.