Cost-effective therapy remission assessment in lymphoma patients using 2-[fluorine-18]fluoro-2-deoxy--glucose-positron emission tomography/ computed tomography: Is an end of treatment exam necessary in all patients?

Annals of Oncology

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 658-664

  Strobel, Klaus ^a   Schaefer, N G ^a   Renner, C ^a   Veit Haibach, P ^a   Husarik, D ^a   Koma, A Y ^a   Hany, T F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Cost effectiveness; FDG PT CT; Lymphoma; Remission assessment; Therapy

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; BARIUM SULFATE; BLEOMYCIN; CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DACARBAZINE; DEXAMETHASONE; DOXORUBICIN; ETOPOSIDE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; MICROPAQUE SCANNER; PREDNISONE; PROCARBAZINE; RITUXIMAB; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VINBLASTINE; VINCRISTINE; VINCRISTINE SULFATE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; B CELL LYMPHOMA; BURKITT LYMPHOMA; CANCER REGRESSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE COURSE; FEMALE; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; LARGE CELL LYMPHOMA; LYMPHOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; NONHODGKIN LYMPHOMA; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCHOOL CHILD; SPIRAL COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHILD; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LYMPHOMA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 34047107851     PISSN: 09237534     EISSN: 15698041     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdl493     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Coiffier B, Lepage E, Briere J et al. CHOP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CHOP alone in elderly patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 235-242.
2. Knight C, Hind D, Brewer N, Abbott V. Rituximab (MabThera) for aggressive non-Hodgkin's ymphoma: Systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2004; 8:iIi, ix-xi, 1-82.
3. Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C et al. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: Coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging - do we need contrast-enhanced CT? Radiology 2004; 232: 823-829.
4. Newman JS, Francis IR, Kaminski MS, Wahl RL. Imaging of lymphoma with PET with 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: Correlation with CT. Radiology 1994; 190: 111-116.
5. Hicks RJ, Mac Manus MP, Seymour JF. Initial staging of lymphoma with positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med 2005; 35: 165-175.
6. Raanani P, Shasha Y, Perry C et al. Is CT scan still necessary for staging in Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients in the PET/CT era? Ann Oncol 2006; 17: 117-122.
7. Jerusalem G, Hustinx R, Beguin Y, Fillet G. Evaluation of therapy for lymphoma. Semin Nucl Med 2005; 35: 186-196.
8. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Verhoef G, Mortelmans L. Positron emission tomography with [(18)F]FDG for therapy remission monitoring in lymphoma patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30 (Suppl 1): S97-105.
9. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al. Use of Positron Emission Tomography for Response Assesment of Lymphoma: Consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007.
10. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM et al. Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 4652-4661.
11. Berger M, Gould MK, Barnett PG. The cost of positron emission tomography in six United States Veterans Affairs hospitals and two academic medical centers. Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181: 359-365.
12. Brix G, Lechel U, Glatting G et al. Radiation exposure of patients undergoing whole-body dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 608-613.
13. Heinrich S, Goerres GW, Schafer M et al. Positron emission tomography/ computed tomography influences on the management of resectable pancreatic cancer and its cost-effectiveness. Ann Surg 2005; 242: 235-243.
14. Valk PE, Abella-Columna E, Haseman MK et al. Whole-body PET imaging with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in management of recurrent colorectal cancer. Arch Surg 1999; 134:503-511; Discussion 511-503.
15. Klose T, Leidl R, Buchmann I, Brambs HJ, Reske SN. Primary staging of lymphomas: Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET versus computed tomography. Eur J Nucl Med 2000; 27: 1457-1464.
16. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour remission using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: Review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer 1999; 35: 1773-1782.
17. Guermazi A, Juweid ME. Commentary: PET poised to alter the current paradigm for remission assessment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Br J Radiol 2006; 79: 365-367.
18. la Fougere C, Hundt W, Brockel N et al. Value of PET/CT versus PET and CT performed as separate investigations in patients with Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006.
19. Kostakoglu L, Leonard JP, Kuji I et al. Comparison of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and Ga-67 scintigraphy in evaluation of lymphoma. Cancer 2002; 94: 879-888.
20. Schaefer NG, Strobel K, Taverna C, Hany TF. Bone involvement in patients with lymphoma: The role of FDG-PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006.
21. Partridge S, Timothy A, O'Doherty MJ et al. 2-Fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-D glucose positron emission tomography in the pretreatment staging of Hodgkin's disease: Influence on patient management in a single institution. Ann Oncol 2000; 11: 1273-1279.
22. Hill M, Cunningham D, MacVicar D et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in predicting relapse in residual masses after treatment of lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11: 2273-2278.
23. Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, O'Doherty MJ et al. 18-FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in the treatment of aggressive Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma-comparison with CT. Leuk Lymphoma 2000; 39: 543-553.
24. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for posttreatment evaluation in Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood 1999; 94: 429-433.
25. Hutchings M, Mikhaeel NG, Fields PA et al. Prognostic value of interim FDG-PET after two or three cycles of chemotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2005; 16: 1160-1168.
26. Mikhaeel NG, Hutchings M, Fields PA et al. FDG-PET after two to three cycles of chemotherapy predicts progression-free and overall survival in high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2005; 16: 1514-1523.
27. Haioun C, Itti E, Rahmouni A et al. [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in aggressive lymphoma: An early prognostic tool for predicting patient outcome. Blood 2005; 106: 1376-1381.
28. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P et al. Early restaging positron emission tomography with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2002; 13: 1356-1363.
29. Kostakoglu L, Coleman M, Leonard JP et al. PET predicts prognosis after 1 cycle of chemotherapy in aggressive lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1018-1027.
30. Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 496-507.
31. Brink I, Reinhardt MJ, Hoegerle S et al. Increased activity in the thymus gland studied with 18F-FDG PET: Age dependency and frequency after chemotherapy. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 591-595.
32. Castellucci P, Nanni C, Farsad M, et al. Potential pitfalls of 18F-FDG PET in a large series of patients treated for malignant lymphoma: prevalence and scan interpretation. Nucl Med Commun 2005; 26: 689-694.
33. Sandherr M, von Schilling C, Link T et al. Pitfalls in imaging Hodgkin's disease with computed tomography and positron emission tomography using fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 719-722.