Prognostic value of [18F]FDG PET radiomics to detect peritoneal and distant metastases in locally advanced gastric cancer: a side study of the prospective multicentre PLASTIC study

Aim: To improve identification of peritoneal and distant metastases in locally advanced gastric cancer using [18F]FDG-PET radiomics. Methods: [18F]FDG-PET scans of 206 patients acquired in 16 different Dutch hospitals in the prospective multicentre PLASTIC-study were analysed. Tumours were delineated and 105 radiomic features were extracted. Three classification models were developed to identify peritoneal and distant metastases (incidence: 21%): a model with clinical variables, a model with radiomic features, and a clinicoradiomic model, combining clinical variables and radiomic features. A least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression classifier was trained and evaluated in a 100-times repeated random split, stratified for the presence of peritoneal and distant metastases. To exclude features with high mutual correlations, redundancy filtering of the Pearson correlation matrix was performed (r = 0.9). Model performances were expressed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). In addition, subgroup analyses based on Lauren classification were performed. Results: None of the models could identify metastases with low AUCs of 0.59, 0.51, and 0.56, for the clinical, radiomic, and clinicoradiomic model, respectively. Subgroup analysis of intestinal and mixed-type tumours resulted in low AUCs of 0.67 and 0.60 for the clinical and radiomic models, and a moderate AUC of 0.71 in the clinicoradiomic model. Subgroup analysis of diffuse-type tumours did not improve the classification performance. Conclusion: Overall, [18F]FDG-PET-based radiomics did not contribute to the preoperative identification of peritoneal and distant metastases in patients with locally advanced gastric carcinoma. In intestinal and mixed-type tumours, the classification performance of the clinical model slightly improved with the addition of radiomic features, but this slight improvement does not outweigh the laborious radiomic analysis. </p

Impact of 18FFDG-PET/CT and laparoscopy in staging of locally advanced gastric cancer: a cost analysis in the prospective multicenter PLASTIC-study

BackgroundUnnecessary D2-gastrectomy and associated costs can be prevented after detecting non-curable gastric cancer, but impact of staging on treatment costs is unclear. This study determined the cost impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18FFDG-PET/CT) and staging laparoscopy (SL) in gastric cancer staging.Materials and MethodsIn this cost analysis, four staging strategies were modeled in a decision tree: (1) 18FFDG-PET/CT first, then SL, (2) SL only, (3) 18FFDG-PET/CT only, and (4) neither SL nor 18FFDG-PET/CT. Costs were assessed on the basis of the prospective PLASTIC-study, which evaluated adding 18FFDG-PET/CT and SL to staging advanced gastric cancer (cT3–4 and/or cN+) in 18 Dutch hospitals. The Dutch Healthcare Authority provided 18FFDG-PET/CT unit costs. SL unit costs were calculated bottom-up. Gastrectomy-associated costs were collected with hospital claim data until 30 days postoperatively. Uncertainty was assessed in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (1000 iterations).Results18FFDG-PET/CT costs were €1104 including biopsy/cytology. Bottom-up calculations totaled €1537 per SL. D2-gastrectomy costs were €19,308. Total costs per patient were €18,137 for strategy 1, €17,079 for strategy 2, and €19,805 for strategy 3. If all patients undergo gastrectomy, total costs were €18,959 per patient (strategy 4). Performing SL only reduced costs by €1880 per patient. Adding 18FFDG-PET/CT to SL increased costs by €1058 per patient; IQR €870–1253 in the sensitivity analysis.ConclusionsFor advanced gastric cancer, performing SL resulted in substantial cost savings by reducing unnecessary gastrectomies. In contrast, routine 18FFDG-PET/CT increased costs without substantially reducing unnecessary gastrectomies, and is not recommended due to limited impact with major costs.Trial registration: NCT03208621. This trial was registered prospectively on 30-06-2017.Surgical oncolog