바로가기  >

Abstract
Backgrounds: Recently, a dualistic carcinogenesis model of ovarian cancer has emerged. We aimed to investigate differences in the glycolytic phenotypes of type I and type II ovarian carcinoma on the basis of FDG uptake and in the pathological features according to tumour grade and histology.

Materials and methods: In total, 386 epithelial ovarian carcinoma patients underwent debulking surgery, and the histopathological results of the patients were retrospectively reviewed from 2003 to 2017. Among these patients, 170 patients had histopathological data that were available due to primary cytoreductive surgery and could be analysed regarding FDG avidity in type I and type II ovarian cancer. The FDG uptake of the tumour (SUVmax), metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were analysed according to the tumour grade, histology and type of ovarian carcinogenesis (type I and II) and prognosis.

Results: Among the 386 patients, there was a significant difference in SUVmax among ovarian cancer subtypes. There was a significant increase in SUVmax as the tumour grade increased (8.08 ± 0.63, 10.5 ± 0.40, and 12.7 ± 0.38 for grades I, II and III, respectively, Kruskal-Wallis test, p < 0.0001). Among the 90 type I and 80 type II ovarian carcinoma patients, there was a significant difference in SUVmax (type I and II, 9.47 ± 0.54 and 12.97 ± 0.70, respectively, Mann-Whitney test, p = 0.0003). However, no significant change in SUVmax was observed between BRCA-positive and BRCA-negative patients (N = 80, 13.8 ± 5.78 and 12.4 ± 6.30, Student's t-test, p = 0.3075). Among clinicopathologic and metabolic parameters, type of ovarian cancer, MTV and CA125 were significant factors in the prediction of recurrence.

Conclusions: The glycolytic phenotype was related to tumour grade and histological subtype, with significant differences between type I and II ovarian cancer. SUVmax of the ovarian cancer would be considered in the differentiation of type I and II ovarian cancer.

Affiliations

Sohyun Park  1 , Tae-Sung Kim  2 , Myong Cheol Lim  3 , Sang-Soo Seo  3 , Sokbom Kang  3 , Seok-Ki Kim  4 , Chong Woo Yoo  5 , Sang-Yoon Park  3
1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Republic of Korea; Department of Nuclear Medicine, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea.
2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea.
3 Center for Uterine and Ovarian Cancer, Hospital, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea; Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Obstetrics and Gynecology, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea.
4 Department of Nuclear Medicine, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea; Molecular Imaging Branch, Research Institute, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: skkim@ncc.re.kr.
5 Center for Uterine and Ovarian Cancer, Hospital, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea; Department of Pathology, National Cancer Center, Republic of Korea.