000K  utf8
1100  2021$c2021-09-15
1500  eng
2050  urn:nbn:de:hbz:465-20240905-120759-2
2051  10.1186/s13014-021-01904-4
3000  Guberina, Maja
3010  Aigner, Clemens
3010  Darwiche, Kaid
3010  Eberhardt, Wilfried E. E.
3010  Gauler, Thomas
3010  Guberina, Nika
3010  Hautzel, Hubertus
3010  Herrmann, Ken
3010  Karpf-Wissel, Rüdiger
3010  Metzenmacher, Martin
3010  Ploenes, Till
3010  Pöttgen, Christoph
3010  Schuler, Martin
3010  Stuschke, Martin
3010  Theegarten, Dirk
3010  Umutlu, Lale
3010  Wiesweg, Marcel
4000  Patterns of nodal spread in stage III NSCLC$dimportance of EBUS-TBNA and 18 F-FDG PET/CT for radiotherapy target volume definition  [Guberina, Maja]
4209  Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the pattern of intra-patient spread of lymph-node (LN)-metastases within the mediastinum as assessed by 18F-FDG PET/CT and systematic endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial-needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) for precise target volume definition in stage III NSCLC. Methods: This is a single-center study based on our preceding investigation, including all consecutive patients with initial diagnosis of stage IIIA-C NSCLC, receiving concurrent radiochemotherapy (12/2011-06/2018). Inclusion criteria were curative treatment intent, 18F-FDG PET/CT and EBUS-TBNA prior to start of treatment. The lymphatic drainage was classified into echelon-1 (ipsilateral hilum), echelon-2 (ipsilateral LN-stations 4 and 7) and echelon-3 (rest of the mediastinum, contralateral hilum). The pattern of spread was classified according to all permutations of echelon-1, echelon-2, and echelon-3 EBUS-TBNA findings. Results: In total, 180 patients were enrolled. Various patterns of LN-spread could be identified. Skip lesions with an involved echelon distal from an uninvolved one were detected in less than 10% of patients by both EBUS-TBNA and PET. The pattern with largest asymmetry was detected in cases with EBUS-TBNA- or PET-positivity at all three echelons ( p < 0.0001, exact symmetry test). In a multivariable logistic model for EBUS-positivity at echelon-3, prognostic factors were PET-positivity at echelon-3 (Hazard ratio (HR) = 12.1; 95%-CI: 3.2 - 46.5), EBUS-TBNA positivity at echelon-2 (HR = 6.7; 95%-CI: 1.31–31.2) and left-sided tumor location (HR = 4.0; 95%-CI: 1.24 - 13.2). There were significantly less combined ipsilateral upper (LN-stations 2 and 4) and lower (LN-station 7) mediastinal involvements (16.8% of patients) with EBUS-TBNA than with PET (38.9%, p < 0.0001, exact symmetry test). EBUS-TBNA detected a lobe specific heterogeneity between the odds ratios of LN-positivity in the upper versus lower mediastinum ( p = 0.0021, Breslow-Day test), while PET did not (p = 0.19). Conclusion: Frequent patterns of LN-metastatic spread could be defined by EBUS-TBNA and PET and discrepancies in the pattern were seen between both methods. EBUS-TBNA showed more lobe and tumor laterality specific patterns of LN-metastases than PET and skipped lymph node stations were rare. These systematic relations offer the opportunity to further refine multi-parameter risk of LN-involvement models for target volume delineation based on pattern of spread by EBUS-TBNA and PET.
4950  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-021-01904-4$xR$3Volltext$534
4950  https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hbz:465-20240905-120759-2$xR$3Volltext$534
4961  https://duepublico2.uni-due.de/receive/duepublico_mods_00077582
5051  610
5550  18F-FDG PET/CT
5550  EBUS-TBNA
5550  Lymphatic drainage
5550  NSCLC
5550  Pattern of spread
5550  Radiation
5550  Stage III