Роль позитронной эмиссионной томографии, совмещенной с компьютерной томографией, с 18F-фтордезоксиглюкозой в диагностике сарком мягких тканей

Саркомы мягких тканей – это редкие гетерогенные злокачественные новообразования, представляющие сложность в диагностике, лечении и последующем наблюдении. Правильное диагностическое планирование позволяет своевременно принять решение о дальнейшей тактике ведения каждого пациента. Позитронная эмиссионная томография, совмещенная с компьютерной томографией, с биологическим аналогом глюкозы 18F-фтордезоксиглюкозой представляет собой инструмент визуализации, измеряющий метаболическую активность опухоли, и широко используется в клинической практике для оценки первичной опухолевой ткани, стадирования, контроля эффективности лечения и как метод раннего выявления рецидивов. Данный обзор литературы посвящен анализу результативности применения позитронной эмиссионной томографии, совмещенной с компьютерной томографией, на разных этапах диагностического контроля пациентов с саркомами мягких тканей.

1. Rebecca L., Siegel M.H., Kimberly D. et al. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clini 2022;72(1):7–33. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21708

2. Состояние онкологической помощи населению России в 2021 году. Под ред. А.Д. Каприна, В.В. Старинского, А.О. Шахзадовой. М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена – филиал ФГБУ «НМИЦ радиологии» Минздрава России, 2022. 239 с.

3. Toro J.R., Travis L.B., Wu H.J. et al. Incidence patterns of soft tissue sarcomas, regardless of primary site, in the surveillance, epidemiology and end results program, 1978–2001: an analysis of 26,758 cases. Int J Cancer 2006;119(12);2922–30. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.22239

4. Coindre J.M., Terrier P., Guillou L. et al. Predictive value of grade for metastasis development in the main histologic types of adult soft tissue sarcomas. Cancer 2001;91(10);1914–26. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(20010515)91:103.0.co;2-3

5. Франк Г.А. Проблемы морфологической классификации и диагностики опухолей мягких тканей. Практическая онкология 2004;5:231–6.

6. Cates J.M.M. The AJCC 8th edition staging system for soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities or trunk: a cohort study of the SEER database. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 2018;16(2):144–52. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2017.7042

7. Клинические рекомендации по диагностике и лечению больных саркомой мягких тканей. Клинические рекомендации Общероссийского союза общественных объединений Ассоциации онкологов России. 2020. Доступно по: https://oncology-association.ru/ wp-content/uploads/2020/09/sarkoma_mjagkih_tkanej.pdf.

8. Skytting B., Meis-Kindblom J.M., Larsson O. et al. Synovial sarcoma – identification of favorable and unfavorable histologic types: a Scandinavian sarcoma group study of 104 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 1999;70(6);543–54. DOI: 10.3109/17453679908997840

9. Improving outcomes for people with sarcoma. Guidance NICE. 2006. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/csg9.

10. Nagano S., Yahiro Y., Yokouchi M. et al. Doppler ultrasound for diagnosis of soft tissue sarcoma: efficacy of ultrasound-based screening score. Radiol Oncol Mar 2015;49(2):135–40. DOI: 10.1515/raon-2015-0011

11. Vibhakar A.M., Cassels J.A., Botchu R. et al. Imaging update on soft tissue sarcoma. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2021;22:101568. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101568

12. Roberts C.C., Kransdorf M.J., Beaman F.D. et al. ACR appropriateness Criteria follow-up of malignant or aggressive musculoskeletal tumors. J Am Coll Radiol 2016;13(4):389–400. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2015.12.019

13. Bar-Shalom R., Valdivia A.Y., Blaufox M.D. et al. PET imaging in oncology. Semin Nucl Med 2000;30(3):150–85. DOI: 10.1053/snuc.2000.7439

14. Sarikaya I., Sarikaya A. Assessing PET parameters in oncologic 18F-FDG studies. J Nucl Med Technol 2020;48(3):278–82. DOI:10.2967/jnmt.119.236109

15. Younis M.H., Abu-Hijleh H.A., Aldahamsheh O.O. et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of primary bone and soft tissue sarcomas by 18F-FDG-PET. Med Princ Pract 2020;29(5):465–72. DOI: 10.1159/000505651

16. Chen L., Wu X., Ma X. et al. Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET-CTbased functional parameters in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: a meta-analysis. Medicine 2017;96(6):5913. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000005913

17. Hui J.Y. Epidemiology and etiology of sarcomas. Surgical clinics 2016;96(5):901–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2016.05.005

18. Etchebehere E.C., Hobbs B.P., Milton D.R. et al. Assessing the role of 18F-FDG PET and 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of soft tissue musculoskeletal malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43(5):860–70. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-015-3242-z

19. Macpherson R.E., Pratap S., Tyrrell H. et al. Retrospective audit of 957 consecutive 18F-FDG PET-CT scans compared to CT and MRI in 493 patients with different histological subtypes of bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Clin Sarcoma Res 2018;8:9. DOI:10.1186/s13569-018-0095-9

20. 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. Am J Roentgenol 2012;198(6):1409–16. DOI:10.2214/ajr.11.7560

21. Katal S., Gholamrezanezhad A., Kessler M. et al. PET in the diagnostic management of soft tissue sarcomas of musculoskeletal origin. PET Clin 2018;13(4):609–21. DOI:10.1016/j.cpet.2018.05.011

22. Schulte M., Brecht-Krauss D., Hamer B. et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography of soft tissue tumors: is noninvasive determination of biological activity possible? Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26(6):599–605. DOI: 10.1007/s002590050427

23. Gabriel M., Rubello D. 18F-FDG PET-CT in soft tissue sarcomas. Nucl Med Commun 2015;37(1):3–8. DOI:10.1097/mnm.0000000000000407

24. Hain S.F., O’Doherty M.J., Bingham J. et al. Can FDG PET be used to successfully direct preoperative biopsy of soft tissue tumours? Nucl Med Commun 2003;24(11):1139–43. DOI: 10.1097/00006231-200311000-00003

25. Fuglø H.M., Jørgensen S.M., Loft A. et al. The diagnostic and prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the initial assessment of highgrade bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39(9):1416–24. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-012-2159-z

26. Annovazzi A., Rea S., Zoccali C. et al. Diagnostic and clinical impact of 18F-FDG PET/CT in staging and restaging soft-tissue sarcomas of the extremities and trunk: mono-institutional retrospective study of a sarcoma referral center. J Clin Med 2020;9(8):2549. DOI: 10.3390/jcm9082549

27. Noebauer-Huhmann I.M., Weber M.A., Lalam R.K. et al. Soft tissue tumors in adults: ESSR-approved guidelines for diagnostic imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2015;19(5):475–82. DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1569251

28. Roberge D., Vakilian S., Alabed Y.Z. et al. FDG PET/CT in initial staging of adult soft-tissue sarcoma. Sarcoma 2012;2012:960194. DOI:10.1155/2012/960194

29. Hagi T., Nakamura T., Sugino et al. Is FDG-PET/CT useful for diagnosing pulmonary metastasis in patients with soft tissue sarcoma? Anticancer Res 2018;38(6):3635–9. DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.12638

30. Keung E.Z., Chiang Y.J., Voss R.K. et al. Defining the incidence and clinical significance of lymph node metastasis in soft tissue sarcoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 2018;44(1):170–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.11.014

31. Lim H.J., Johnny Ong C.A., Tan J.W. et al. Utility of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging in the evaluation of sarcomas: a systematic review. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2019;143: 1–13. DOI:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.07.002

32. Tanaka K., Ogawa G., Mizusawa J. et al. Prospective comparison of various radiological response criteria and pathological response to preoperative chemotherapy and survival in operable high-grade soft tissue sarcomas in the Japan Clinical Oncology Group study JCOG0304. World J Surg Oncol 2018;16(1):1–8. DOI: 10.1186/s12957-018-1462-y

33. Gui C., Morris C.D., Meyer C.F. et al. Characterization and predictive value of volume changes of extremity and pelvis soft tissue sarcomas during radiation therapy prior to definitive wide excision. Radiat Oncol J 2019;37(2):117–26. DOI: 10.3857/roj.2018.00549

34. Блудов А.Б., Замогильная Я.А., Неред А.С. и др. Основы методики контрастной МРТ в оценке эффективности предоперационной химиотерапии у больных с саркомами костей и мягких тканей. Саркомы костей, мягких тканей и опухоли кожи 2011;4:41–50.

35. 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. Clinic Cancer Res 2009;15(8);2856–63. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-08-2537

36. Schuetze S.M., Rubin B.P., Vernon C. et al. Use of positron emission tomography in localized extremity soft tissue sarcoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer 2005;103(2):339–48. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.20769.

37. Evilevitch V., Weber W.A., Tap W.D. et al. Reduction of glucose metabolic activity is more accurate than change in size at predicting histopathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14(3):715–20. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-07-1762

38. Ezuddin N.S., Pretell-Mazzini J., Yechieli R.L. et al. Local recurrence of soft-tissue sarcoma: issues in imaging surveillance strategy. Skeletal Radiol 2018;47(12):1595–606. DOI: 10.1007/s00256-018-2965-x

39. Benz M.R., Crompton J.G., Harder D. PET/CT variants and pitfalls in bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Semin Nucl Med 2021;51(6):584–92. DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2021.06.009.

40. Piperkova E., Mikhaeil M., Mousavi A. et al. Impact of PET and CT in PET/CT studies for staging and evaluating treatment response in bone and soft tissue sarcomas. Clin Nucl Med 2009;34(3):146–50. DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e3181966f9d

41. Ibraheem A.L., Buck A.K., Benz M.R. et al. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of recurrent bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer 2013;119(6):1227–34. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27866

42. Ranieri G., Mammi M., Donato E. Pazopanib a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with strong anti-angiogenetic activity: a new treatment for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2014;89(2):322–39. DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2013.08.012

43. Larson S.M., Erdi Y., Akhurst T. et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging. The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2(3):159–71. DOI: 10.1016/s1095-0397(99)00016-3

44. Choi E.S., Ha S.G., Kim H.S. et al. Total lesion glycolysis by 18F-FDG PET/CT is a reliable predictor of prognosis in soft-tissue sarcoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013;40(12):1836–42. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-013-2511-y

45. Hong S., Lee S.E., Choi Y.L. et al. Prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: comparisons between metabolic parameters. Skeletal Radiology 2014;43(5):641–8. DOI:10.1007/s00256-014-1832-7

46. Chang K.J., Lim I., Park J.Y. et al. The role of 18F-FDG PET/CT as a prognostic factor in patients with synovial sarcoma. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015;49(1):33–41. DOI: 10.1007/s13139-014-0301-5