18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters as imaging biomarkers in XXXX , is visual analysis of PET and contrast enhanced CT better than the numbers?

@entity1 @entity5 @entity1544 @entity3 @entity209 @entity1349
PURPOSE: This study was designed to seek associations between positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) parameters, contrast enhanced neck computed tomography (CECT) and pathological findings, and to determine the potential prognostic value of PET/CT and CECT parameters in @entity1544 ( @entity1544 ). MATERIALS AND METHOD: 36 @entity1544 @entity1 underwent staging PET/CT and 30/36 of @entity1 had CECT. PET/CT parameters were measured for the @entity5 and the hottest involved node, including maximum, mean, and peak standardized uptake values (SUV max, SUV mean, and SUV peak), metabolic @entity5 volume (MTV), total lesion glycolysis (TLG), @entity209 ( @entity209 ), and normalized @entity209 (N @entity209 ). Qualitative assessment of PET/CT and CECT were also performed. Pathological outcomes included: perineural invasion, @entity3 , nodal extracapsular spread, grade, pathologic T and N stages. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit for each parameter and outcome adjusting for potentially confounding variables. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used for progression free survival (PFS), locoregional recurrence free survival (LRFS), @entity1349 ( @entity1349 ) and distant @entity3 free survival (DMFS). RESULTS: In multivariable analysis, @entity1 with high (>=  median) @entity5 SUV max (OR 6.3), SUV mean (OR 6.3), MTV (OR 19.0), TLG (OR 19.0), @entity209 (OR 11.7) and N @entity209 (OR 19.0) had high pathological T-stage (T3/T4) (p<0.05). Ring/heterogeneous pattern on CECT qualitative assessment was associated with worse DMFS and @entity1349 . CONCLUSION: High PET/CT parameters were associated with pathologically advanced T stage (T3/T4). Qualitative assessment of CECT has prognostic value. PET/CT parameters did not predict clinical outcome.
