The prognostic utility of 18F-FDG PET parameters in lymphoma patients under CAR-T-cell therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has attracted considerable attention since its recent endorsement by the Food and Drug Administration, as it has emerged as a promising immunotherapeutic modality within the landscape of oncology. This study explores the prognostic utility of [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ([18F]FDG PET) in lymphoma patients undergoing CAR T-cell therapy. Through meta-analysis, pooled hazard ratio (HR) values were calculated for specific PET metrics in this context.
MethodsPubMed, Scopus, and Ovid databases were explored to search for relevant topics. Dataset retrieval from inception until March 12, 2024, was carried out. The primary endpoints were impact of specific PET metrics on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) before and after treatment. Data from the studies were extracted for a meta-analysis using Stata 17.0.
ResultsOut of 27 studies identified for systematic review, 15 met the criteria for meta-analysis. Baseline OS analysis showed that total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV) had the highest HR of 2.66 (95% CI: 1.52-4.66), followed by Total-body total lesion glycolysis (TTLG) at 2.45 (95% CI: 0.98-6.08), and maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) at 1.30 (95% CI: 0.77-2.19). TMTV and TTLG were statistically significant (p < 0.0001), whereas SUVmax was not (p = 0.33). For PFS, TMTV again showed the highest HR at 2.65 (95% CI: 1.63-4.30), with TTLG at 2.35 (95% CI: 1.40-3.93), and SUVmax at 1.48 (95% CI: 1.08-2.04), all statistically significant (p ≤ 0.01). The ΔSUVmax was a significant predictor for PFS with an HR of 2.05 (95% CI: 1.13-3.69, p = 0.015).
Conclusion[18F]FDG PET parameters are valuable prognostic tools for predicting outcome of lymphoma patients undergoing CAR T-cell therapy.
CITE THIS COLLECTION
REFERENCES
- https://doi.org//10.1002/ajh.25418
- https://doi.org//10.3390/cancers13236067
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s13045-017-0444-9
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMoa1707447
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMoa1709866
- https://doi.org//10.1056/NEJMoa1914347
- https://doi.org//10.1002/jha2.338
- https://doi.org//10.3390/cancers15041063
- https://doi.org//10.3390/cancers14194700
- https://doi.org//10.1080/10428190903040048
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0211649
- https://doi.org//10.1182/blood-2010-12-327767
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ejca.2019.09.027
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s00259-018-4005-4
SHARE
Usage metrics
Read the peer-reviewed publication

AUTHORS (14)
- AAAkram Al-IbraheemAAAhmed Saad AbdlkadirDADhuha Ali Al-AdhamiMSMike SathekgeHBHenry Hee-Seung BomMMMohammad Ma’kosehAMAsem MansourHAHikmat Abdel-RazeqKAKamal Al-RabiEEEnrique Estrada-LobatoMAMaysaa Al-HussainiIMIsmail MatalkaZRZaid Abdel RahmanSFStephano Fanti
CATEGORIES
- Transplantation Immunology
- Tumour Immunology
- Immunology not elsewhere classified
- Immunology
- Veterinary Immunology
- Animal Immunology
- Genetic Immunology
- Applied Immunology (incl. Antibody Engineering, Xenotransplantation and T-cell Therapies)
- Autoimmunity
- Cellular Immunology
- Humoural Immunology and Immunochemistry
- Immunogenetics (incl. Genetic Immunology)
- Innate Immunity