Erratum: Direct comparison of [18F]FDG PET/CT with PET alone and with side-by-side PET and CT in patients with malignant melanoma (European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (2007) 34, (xx) DOI: 10.1007/s00259-006-0358-1);Direct comparison of [18F]FDG PET/CT with PET alone and with side-by-side PET and CT in patients with malignant melanoma

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 34, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 1355-1364

  Mottaghy, Felix M ^a   Sunderkötter, Cord ^a,b   Schubert, Roland ^a   Wohlfart, Petra ^a   Blumstein, Norbert M ^a   Neumaier, Bernd ^a   Glatting, Gerhard ^a   Özdemir, Cueneyt ^a   Buck, Andreas K ^a   Scharfetter Kochanek, Karin ^a   Reske, Sven N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ULM   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

Malignant melanoma; Oncology; PET CT; 18F FDG PET

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; NERVE GROWTH FACTOR; PROTEIN S 100; S 100 CALCIUM BINDING PROTEIN BETA SUBUNIT; S-100 CALCIUM-BINDING PROTEIN BETA SUBUNIT; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER PATIENT; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DRUG UPTAKE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MELANOMA; PATIENT REFERRAL; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; BIOSYNTHESIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; IMAGE PROCESSING; METASTASIS; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; ONCOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; RISK; ROC CURVE; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MEDICAL ONCOLOGY; MELANOMA; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; NERVE GROWTH FACTORS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK; ROC CURVE; S100 PROTEINS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 34548167806     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-007-0463-9     Document Type: Erratum

References (30)

1. Garbe C, Paul A, Kohler-Spath H, Ellwanger U, Stroebel W, Schwarz M, et al. Prospective evaluation of a follow-up schedule in cutaneous melanoma patients: recommendations for an effective follow-up strategy. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:520-9.
2. Morton DL, Wanek L, Nizze JA, Elashoff RM, Wong JH. Improved long-term survival after lymphadenectomy of melanoma metastatic to regional nodes. Analysis of prognostic factors in 1134 patients from the John Wayne Cancer Clinic. Ann Surg 1991;214:491-9.
3. Wood TF, DiFronzo LA, Rose DM, Haigh PI, Stern SL, Wanek L, et al. Does complete resection of melanoma metastatic to solid intra-abdominal organs improve survival? Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8:658-62.
4. Ollila DW, Hsueh EC, Stern SL, Morton DL. Metastasectomy for recurrent stage IV melanoma. J Surg Oncol 1999;71:209-13.
5. Balch CM, Buzaid AC, Soong SJ, Atkins MB, Cascinelli N, Coit DG, et al. Final version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3635-48.
6. Stephens PL, Ariyan S, Ocampo RV, Poo WJ. The predictive value of lymphoscintigraphy for nodal metastases of cutaneous melanoma. Conn Med 1999;63:387-90.
7. Dicker TJ, Kavanagh GM, Herd RM, Ahmad T, McLaren KM, Chetty U, et al. A rational approach to melanoma follow-up in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma. Scottish Melanoma Group. Br J Dermatol 1999;140:249-54.
8. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: results of a prospective study of 100 patients. Cancer 1998;82:1664-71.
9. Holder WD Jr, White RL Jr, Zuger JH, Easton EJ Jr, Greene FL. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography for the detection of melanoma metastases. Ann Surg 1998;227:764-9; discussion 769-71.
10. Eigtved A, Andersson AP, Dahlstrom K, Rabol A, Jensen M, Holm S, et al. Use of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the detection of silent metastases from malignant melanoma. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27:70-5.
11. Swetter SM, Carroll L, Johnson D, Segall G. Positron emission tomography (PET) is superior to computerized tomography (CT) for metastatic staging in melanoma patients. Clin Positron Imaging 2000;3:154.
12. Swetter SM, Carroll LA, Johnson DL, Segall GM. Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography for metastatic detection in melanoma patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2002;9:646-53.
13. Harris MT, Berlangieri SU, Cebon JS, Davis ID, Scott AM. Impact of 2-deoxy-2[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography on the management of patients with advanced melanoma. Mol Imaging Biol 2005;23:1-5.
14. 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging for N- and M-staging of malignant melanoma: experience with 250 consecutive patients. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:1178-87.
15. Mijnhout GS, Hoekstra OS, van Lingen A, van Diest PJ, Ader HJ, Lammertsma AA, et al. How morphometric analysis of metastatic load predicts the (un)usefulness of PET scanning: the case of lymph node staging in melanoma. J Clin Pathol 2003;56:283-6.
16. Fink AM, Holle-Robatsch S, Herzog N, Mirzaei S, Rappersberger K, Lilgenau N, et al. Positron emission tomography is not useful in detecting metastasis in the sentinel lymph node in patients with primary malignant melanoma stage I and II. Melanoma Res 2004;14:141-5.
17. Schäfer A, Herbst RA, Beiteke U, Lange-Ionescu S, Treckmann H, Lohlein D, et al. [Sentinel lymph node excision (SLNE) and positron emission tomography in the staging of stage I-II melanoma patients]. Hautarzt 2003;54:440-7.
18. Wagner JD, Schauwecker D, Davidson D, Coleman JJ 3rd, Saxman S, Hutchins G, et al. Prospective study of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging of lymph node basins in melanoma patients undergoing sentinel node biopsy. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1508-15.
19. Crippa F, Leutner M, Belli F, Gallino F, Greco M, Pilotti S, et al. Which kinds of lymph node metastases can FDG PET detect? A clinical study in melanoma. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1491-4.
20. Wagner JD, Schauwecker D, Davidson D, Logan T, Coleman JJ 3rd, Hutchins G, et al. Inefficacy of F-18 fluorodeoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography scans for initial evaluation in early-stage cutaneous melanoma. Cancer 2005;104:570-9.
21. 18F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1797-803.
22. Breslow A. Thickness, cross-sectional areas and depth of invasion in the prognosis of cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg 1970;172:902-8.
23. Berthelsen AK, Holm S, Loft A, Klausen TL, Andersen F, Hojgaard L. PET/CT with intravenous contrast can be used for PET attenuation correction in cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32:1167-75.
24. Burger C, Goerres G, Schoenes S, Buck A, Lonn AH, Von Schulthess GK. PET attenuation coefficients from CT images: experimental evaluation of the transformation of CT into PET 511-keV attenuation coefficients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:922-7.
25. Harpio R, Einarsson R. S100 proteins as cancer biomarkers with focus on S100B in malignant melanoma. Clin Biochem 2004;37:512-8.
26. Metz CE, Herman BA, Shen JH. Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves from continuously-distributed data. Stat Med 1998;17:1033-53.
27. Bockisch A, Beyer T, Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Kuhl H, Debatin JF, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography-imaging protocols, artifacts, and pitfalls. Mol Imaging Biol 2004;6:188-99.
28. Gritters LS, Francis IR, Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Initial assessment of positron emission tomography using 2-fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in the imaging of malignant melanoma. J Nucl Med 1993;34:1420-7.
29. Krug B, Dietlein M, Groth W, Stutzer H, Psaras T, Gossmann A, et al. Fluor-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in malignant melanoma. Diagnostic comparison with conventional imaging methods. Acta Radiol 2000;41:446-52.
30. Libberecht K, Husada G, Peeters T, Michiels P, Gys T, Molderez C. Initial staging of malignant melanoma by positron emission tomography and sentinel node biopsy. Acta Chir Belg 2005;105:621-5.