Role of 18F-FDG PET for evaluating Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 149-154

  Nanni, Cristina ^a   Castellucci, Paolo ^a   Farsad, Mohsen ^a   Pinto, Carmine ^b   Moretti, Andrea ^a   Pettinato, Cinzia ^c   Marengo, Mario ^c   Boschi, Stefano ^a   Franchi, Roberto ^a   Martoni, Andrea ^b   Monetti, Nino ^a   Fanti, Stefano ^a,c  

^a Unita Operativa Medicina Nucleare   (Italy)

^b Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria di Bologna   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

18F FDG PET; Computed tomography; Malignant pleural mesothelioma

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MALE; MALIGNANT MESOTHELIOMA; MEDIASTINUM LYMPH NODE; PLEURA MESOTHELIOMA; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; WHOLE BODY SCINTISCANNING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; MESOTHELIOMA; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PLEURA TUMOR;

ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MALE; MESOTHELIOMA; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; PLEURAL NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 2542505264     PISSN: 10849785     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/108497804323071913     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Peto J, Recarli A, La Vecchia C, et al. The European mesotelioma epidemic. Br J Cancer 1999;79:666.
2. Eibel R, Tuengerthal S, Schoenberg SO. The role of new imaging techniques in diagnosis and staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Curr Opin Oncol 2003;15:131.
3. Silvestri GA, Tanoue LT, Margolis ML, et al. The non-invasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer: The guidelines. Chest 2003;123(suppl. 1):147S.
4. Fritscher-Ravens A, Bohuslavizki KH, Brandt L, et al. Mediastinal lymph node involvement in potentially resectable lung cancer: Comparison of CT, positron emission tomography, and endoscopic ultrasonography with and without fine-needle aspiration. Chest 2003;123:442.
5. Buchmann I, Guhlmann CA, Elsner K, et al. F-18-FDG PET for primary diagnosis differential diagnosis of pleural processes. Nuklearmedizin 1999;38:319.
6. Rusch VW, Godwin JD, Shuman WP. The role of computed tomography scanning in the initial assessment and the follow-up of malignant pleural mesothelioma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1988;96:171.
7. Sugarbaker DJ, Strauss GM, Lynch TJ, et al. Node status has prognostic significance in the multimodality therapy of diffuse, malignant mesothelioma. J Clin Oncol 1993;11:1172.
8. Tammiletho L, Kivisaari L, Salmien US, et al. Evaluation of the clinical TNM staging system for malignant pleural mesotelioma: An assessment in 88 patients. Lung Cancer 1995;12:25.
9. Zubeldia J, Abou-Zied M, Nabi H. Evaluation of patients with known mesothelioma with 18F-fluorode-oxyglucose and PET: Comparison with computed tomography. Clin Positron Imaging 2000;3:165.
10. Marom EM, Erasmus JJ, Pass HI, et al. The role of imaging in malignant pleural mesothelioma. Semin Oncol 2002;29:26.