BACKGROUND In Hodgkin disease (HD), accurate assessment of the extent of disease is essential because it provides the basis for different treatment strategies. In addition to conventional imaging methods (CIM), positron emission tomography with fluorine‐18‐fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG‐PET) may permit reliable differentiation between lymphoma and nonmalignant tissue and thus improve determination of the stage of the disease. The aim of the current study was to assess the clinical value of FDG‐PET for primary staging, treatment monitoring, and assessment in a suspected case of recurrent HD. METHODS Eighty‐one patients with HD underwent 106 FDG‐PET studies using a dedicated whole body PET ring scanner. In 25 patients PET was part of the primary staging, 63 PET studies were undertaken for treatment monitoring after the completion of treatment, and in 18 patients PET was performed in cases of suspected recurrence of HD. PET scans were compared with CIM and verified histologically and/or by follow‐up evaluation (mean follow‐up duration, 20.4 months). RESULTS With regard to primary staging, in a patient to patient analysis, both PET scans and CIM were positive (i.e., showed pathologic foci indicative of HD) in 24 of 25 cases. In a staging‐relevant lesion to lesion analysis, accuracy in the determination of the stage of disease was 96% for PET versus 56% for CIM. PET led to a lower stage classification in 28% and a higher stage classification in 12% of cases, compared with the stage assumed with CIM. With regard to treatment monitoring, PET showed an accuracy of 91% compared with 62% for CIM. The negative predictive value of PET was 96%. With regard to suspected recurrence, PET findings were true‐positive in 10 of 12 PET scans and true‐negative in 5 of 6 PET scans, resulting in accuracy of 83%, which compares favorably with the accuracy rate of 56% for CIM. CONCLUSIONS It may be concluded that FDG‐PET is capable of determining the stage of HD with great accuracy and is capable of correctly detecting manifestations of HD in treatment monitoring and cases of suspected recurrence, in which CIM occasionally result in equivocal findings. The results of the current study suggest that FDG‐PET should become a routine tool in the staging/restaging of HD. Cancer 2001;91:302–10. © 2001 American Cancer Society.

It may be concluded that FDG-PET is capable of determining the stage of HD with great accuracy and is capable of correctly detecting manifestations of HD in treatment monitoring and cases of suspected recurrence, in which CIM occasionally result in equivocal findings. The results of the current study suggest that FDG-PET should become a routine tool in the staging/restaging of HD.

5512 Background: Are 6 cycles of once weekly DDP plus one cycle of 5-FU with concurrent HART superior to 2 cycles of MMC plus one cycle of 5-FU in terms of overall survival (OS) and metastases-free survival (MFS)? Methods: Eligibility: Stage IV SCC of oro(OP)- and hypopharynx(HP), KFS of ≥80% stratified for sites, N-status, grading, hemoglobin and center. The HART schedule was reported elsewhere (V.Budach, JCO 23;2005). HART was applied concurrently with DDP/5-FU at 30mg/m² days 1,8,15,22,29,36 or MMC/5-FU at 10mg/m2 day 1+36 and for both arms with 600mg/m² 5-FU days 1-5 as 120 hrs. c.i. TVD dose prescription was 72 Gy using 3D-conformal or IMRT-TP. 364 patients were analysed using an ITT principle for OS, MFS, progression-free survival (PFS) and loco-regional control (LRC). Hazard ratio (HR) calculations were adjusted for competing risk factors. Results: Median follow-up was 48 mos. for both arms. Mean age was 55.4 years, 83/17% were male/female and 100% stage IV patients (UICC 2002). 58.5%/41.5% of all patients suffered from OP- or HP cancer, respectively. The OS and MFS at 4 years for the DDP- versus MMC-arm was 42.1% vs. 38.8% (n.s.) and 67.3% vs. 56.6% (p=.05), respectively. The LRC and PFS for the DDP versus MMC-arm was 58.6% vs. 57.2% (n.s.) and 46.4% vs. 38.7% (n.s.). Seven items recorded for acute toxicity and 9 for late morbidity showed no significant differences between the treatment arms except for creatinine for the DDP-arm (p < 0.001) using nonparametric analyses of variances for repeated measurements. The overall compliance rates for RTX were 96%, DDP: 72%, 5-FU: 97%, MMC: 86%, respectively. Conclusions: This phase III trial first establishes level IB-evidence for a once weekly DDP chemoradiation regimen. For MFS at 4 yrs., DDP/5 FU-HART is superior to MMC/5 FU HART at equal levels of acute and late radiation sequelae for both treatment arms. No significant differences were seen yet for OS, PFS or LRC. Chemoradiation with weekly DDP/5-FU or MMC/5-FU shows excellent compliance rates and can easily compete with other concurrent chemo- or bio-radiation schedules including induction TPF followed by radiation.

No abstract

No abstract