Fig 1.
FDG PET/CT transaxial and sagittal images of four representative patients with Qual4PS scores of 1–4.
(a) Score 1: no detectable focal uptake; (b) Score 2: focal FDG uptake greater than that in the surrounding tissue or in the mediastinal blood pool, but not greater than that of the liver; (c) Score 3: diffuse FDG uptake greater than that in the mediastinal blood pool up to marginally greater than that of the liver, and suggestive of esophagitis; (d) Score 4: focal FDG uptake substantially greater than that of liver.
Table 1.
Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients.
Fig 2.
Patients listed by order of SUVmax plots against the number of binary categorization (positive versus negative) by five reviewers using the Qual4PS criterion for post-CRT FDG PET interpretation.
Table 2.
Agreement between pairs of reviewers with respect to positive versus negative PET/CT by Qual4PS using Cohen’s k.
Fig 3.
Kaplan-Meier plots of overall survival based on post-CRT FDG PET scans using (a) Qual4PS, (b) QualBK, (c) SUVmax3.4, (d) SUVmax2.5, (e) ΔSUVmax71.6%, and (f) ΔSUVmax50% cut-offs.
Fig 4.
Kaplan-Meier plots of overall survival based on post-CRT FDG PET scans using (a) SUVmean2.4, (b) MV2.2, (c) TLG4.99 cut-offs, and (d) AJCC stage.
Table 3.
Prognostic factors for overall survival by univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.
Fig 5.
Kaplan-Meier plots of overall survival for subgrouping patients according to therapeutic management: dCRT versus trimodality and post-CRT FDG PET results based on (a) Qual4PS and (b) PET-CR.