18F-FDG PET for the diagnosis and grading of soft-tissue sarcoma: A meta-analysis

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 44, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 717-724

  Ioannidis, John P A ^a,b   Lau, Joseph ^a  

^a TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

Author keywords

18F FDG PET; Meta analysis; Soft tissue sarcoma

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DRUG UPTAKE; EMBASE; GLUCOSE TRANSPORT; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFT TISSUE SARCOMA; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SARCOMA; SCINTISCANNING;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; SARCOMA; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 0037945459     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Delbeke D, Martin WH. Positron emission tomography imaging in oncology Radiol Clin North Am. 2001;39:883-917.
2. Eary JF. Nuclear medicine in cancer diagnosis. Lancet. 1999;354:853-857
3. National Cancer Institute. SEER Cancer Statistics Review. Available at: http://seer-cancer.gov. Accessed on February 16, 2003.
4. Pisters PW, Leung DH, Woodruff J, Shi W, Brennan MF. Analysis of prognostic factors in 1041 patients with localized soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities. J Clin Oncol 1996,14:1679-1689.
5. Moses LE, Shapiro D, Littenberg B. Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations Stat Med. 1993;12:1293-1316.
6. Littenberg B, Moses LE. Estimating diagnostic accuracy from multiple conflicting reports: a new meta-analytic method. Med Decis Making. 1993,13:313-321
7. El-Zeftway H, Heiba SI, Jana S, et al. Role of repeated F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose imaging in management of patients with bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer Biother Radiopharmaceut. 2001;16:37-46.
8. Shulkin BL, Mitchell DS, Ungar DR, et al. Neoplasms m a pediatric population: 2-[F-18]-nuoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET studies Radiology. 1995,194:495-500
9. Ahmed AR, Watanabe H, Aoki J, Shinozaki T, Takagishi K. Schwannoma of the extremities, the role of PET in preoperative planning. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:1541-1551.
10. Eary JF, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, et al. Quantitative [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in pretreatment and grading of sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res. 1998;4:1215-1220
11. Folpe AL, Lyles RH, Sprouse JT, Conrad EU III, Eary JF. (F-18) fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a predictor of pathologic grade and other prognostic variables in bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2000,6:1279-1287.
12. Schwarzbach M, Willeke F, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, et al. Functional imaging and detection of local recurrence in soft tissue sarcomas by positron emission tomography Anticancer Res 1999;19:1343-1349.
13. 18F-FDG studies in patients with primary and recurrent soft-tissue sarcomas: impact on diagnosis and correlation with grading. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:713-720.
14. Schwarzbach MH, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Willeke F, et al. Clinical value of [18-F]] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in soft tissue sarcomas. Ann Surg. 2000;231:380-386.
15. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose. Ann Surg Oncol. 1997;4:57-63
16. Kole AC, Plaat BEC, Hoekstra HJ, Vaalburg W, Molenaar WM. FDG and L-[1-11C]-tyrosine imaging of soft-tissue tumors before and after therapy J Nucl Med 1999;40:381-386.
17. Nieweg OE, Pruim J, van Ginkel RJ, et al. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose PET imaging of soft-tissue sarcoma. J Nucl Med. 1996,37:257-261.
18. van Ginkel RJ, Hoekstra HJ, Pruim J, et al. FDG-PET to evaluate response to hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion for locally advanced soft-tissue sarcoma. J Nucl Med. 1996;37.984-990
19. Hain SF, O'Doherty J, Lucas JD, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the evaluation of amputation for soft tissue sarcoma. Nuclear Med Commun. 1999;20:845-848
20. Ferner RE, Lucas JD, O'Doherty MJ, et al. Evaluation of 18uorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ((18)FDG PET) in the detection of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours arising from within plexiform neurofibromas in neurofibromatosis 1. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000;68:353-357.
21. Lodge MA, Lucas JD, Marsden PK, Cronin BF, O'Doherty MJ, Smith MA. A PET study of 18FDG uptake in soft tissue masses. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26:22-30.
22. Lucas JD, O'Doherty MJ, Wong JC, et al. Evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of soft-tissue sarcomas. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:441-447.
23. Lucas JD, O' Doherty MJ, Cronin BF, et al. Prospective evaluation of soft tissue masses and sarcomas using fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Br J Surg 1999;86:550-556
24. Jones DN, McCowage GB, Sostman HD, et al. Monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy response of soft-tissue and musculoskeletal sarcoma using fluorine-18-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:1438-1444.
25. Griffeth LK, Dehdashti F, McGuire AH, et al. PET evaluation of soft-tissue masses with fluorine-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology. 1992;182 185-194.
26. Kern KA, Brunetti A, Norton JA, et al. Metabolic imaging of human extremity musculoskeletal tumors by PET. J Nucl Med. 1988;29 181-186.
27. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Heymer B, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography of soft tissue tumours: is a non-invasive determination of biological activity possible? Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:599-605.
28. 18F]FDG. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1990;14.960-962.
29. Watanabe H, Shinozaki T, Yanagawa T, et al. Glucose metabolic analysis of musculoskeletal tumours using 18fluorine-FDG PET as an aid to preoperative planning. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82:760-767.
30. Easterbrook P, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991;337:867-872.
31. Lowe VJ, Fletcher JW, Gobar L, et al Prospective investigation of positron emission tomography in lung nodules. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16 1075-1084
32. Price P, Jones T. Can positron emission tomography (PET) be used to detect subclinical response to cancer therapy? The EC PET Oncology Concerted Action and the EORTC PET Study Group Eur J Cancer. 1995;31:1924-1927
33. Balk EM, Lau J PET scans and technology assessment déjà vu? JAMA. 2001;285:936-937.
34. Gambhir SS, Hoh CK, Phelps ME, Madar I, Maddani J. Decision tree sensitivity analysis for cost effectiveness of FDG PET in the staging and management of non-small-cell lung carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:1428-1436.
35. Shields AF, Mankoff DA, Link JM, et al. [C-11]thymidine and FDG to measure therapy response. J Nucl Med. 1998;39:1757-1762.
36. Shields AF, Grierson JR, Dohmen BM, et al. Imaging proliferation in vivo with [F-18]FLT and positron emission tomography. Nat Med. 1998;4:1334-1336.