Positron emission tomography (PET) in oncology: A part of medical therapeutic expertise;Positronen-emissions-tomografie in der onkologie - Bestandteil der ärztlichen behandlungskunst

Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift

Volumn 131, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 512-515

  Bamberg, M ^a   Diehl, V ^b   Herrmann, T ^c   Jurgens H ^d   Siewert, J R ^e   Kotzerke, Jörg ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

^b Deutsche Hodgkin Studien Gruppe (DHSG)   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL CARL GUSTAV CARUS   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL MÜNSTER   (Germany)

^e TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE;

BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER; CANCER SCINTISCANNING; CANCER STAGING; COLORECTAL CARCINOMA; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; ESOPHAGUS CARCINOMA; HUMAN; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LYMPHOMA; MELANOMA; ONCOLOGY; OVARY CARCINOMA; PANCREAS CARCINOMA; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PROSTATE CANCER; REVIEW;

CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; ENERGY METABOLISM; EUROPE; GERMANY; HUMANS; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; NEOPLASM STAGING; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 33645099487     PISSN: 00120472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-932553     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Apisarnthanarax S, Chao KS. Current imaging paradigms in radiation oncology. Radiat Res 2005; 163: 1-25
2. Baum RP, Sölnder J, Schmücking M, Niesen A. Peptidrezeptorvermittelte Radiotherapie (PRRT) neuroendokriner Tumoren. Onkologe 2004; 10: 1098-1110
3. Bedford M, Maisey MN. Requirements for clinical PET: comparisons within Europe. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 208-221
4. Bourguet P, Blanc-Vincent MP, Boneu A et al. Summary of the Standards, Options and Recommendations for the use of positron emission tomography with 2-(18F)fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDP-PET scanning) in oncology (2002). Br J Cancer 2003; 89 (Suppl 1); S84-91
5. Bradbury I, Facey K, Laking G, Sharp P. Investing in new technology: the PET experience. Br J Cancer 2003; 89: 224-227
6. Buell U, Schober O, Osieka R. Fortschritte in der Chirurgie - ohne Fortschritte in der Medizintechnik? Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2001; 126: 1188-1189
7. Dietlein M, Schicha H. Reimbursement of the PET in oncology in Europe: a questionnaire based survey. Nuklearmedizin 2003; 42: 80-85
8. Franzius C, Lang K, Wormanns D, Vormoor J, Schober O. PET/CT und PET - Einsatz in der pädiatrischen Onkologie. Nuklearmediziner 2004; 27: 315-323
9. Glocker S, Weiß G, Bamberg M. Finanzierung von Innovationen in der Onkologie. Probleme und Lösungsmöglichkeiten. Onkologe 2005; 11: 198-204
10. Grosu AL, Piert M, Weber WA et al. Positron Emission Tomography for Radiation Treatment Planning. Strahlenther Onkol 2005; 181: 483-499
11. Meta J, Seltzer M, Schiepers C et al. Impact of 18F-FDG PET on managing patients with colorectal cancer: the referring physician's perspective. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 586-590
12. Perleth M, Gerhardus A, Velasco-Garrido M. Positronen-Emissions- Tomographie. Systematische Übersichten zur Wirksamkeit bei ausgewählten indikationen. Sankt Augustin: Asgard-Verlag Dr. Werner Hippe GmbH, 2003
13. Pfister DG, Johnson DH, Azzoli CG et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology treatment of unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer guideline: update2003. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 330-353
14. Pfistner B, Paulus U, Olderog M, Houben P, Brosteanu O. Qualitätssicherungsprozesse in wissenschaftsinitiierten klinischen Studien. Ist nach Inkrafttreten der 12. AMG-Novelle eine Verbesserung der klinischen Forschung zu erwarten? Onkologe 2005; 12: 1269-1277
15. Reske SN, Kotzerke J. FDG-PET for clinical use. Results of the 3rd German Interdisciplinary Consensus Conference, "Onko-PET III", 21 July and 19 September 2000. Eur J Nucl Med 2001; 28: 1707-1723
16. Schmoll HJ, Souchon R, Krege S et al. European consensus on diagnosis and treatment of germ cell cancer: a report of the European Germ Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1377-1399
17. Seltzer MA, Yap CS, Silverman DH et al. The impact of PET on the management of lung cancer: the referring physician's perspective. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 752-756
18. Valk PE. Do we need randomised trials to evaluate diagnostic procedures? Against. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 132-135
19. van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF et al. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 359: 1388-1393
20. Verboom P, van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS et al. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30: 1444-1449
21. Weckesser M, Schober O. Is whole-body FDG-PET valuable for health screening? Against. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 342-343
22. Wissenschaftsrat. Stellungnahme zur Positronen-Emissions-Tomographie (PET) in Hochschulkliniken und außeruniversitären Forschungseinrichtungen. Greifswald, 2001
23. Yasuda S, Ide M, Fujii H et al. Application of positron emission tomography imaging to cancer screening. Br J Cancer 2000; 83: 1607-1611
24. Zophel K, Kotzerke J. Is 11C-choline the most appropriate tracer for prostate cancer? Against. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 756-759