Molecular imaging techniques in body imaging

Radiology

Volumn 245, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 333-356

  Margolis, Daniel J A ^a,d   Hoffman, John M ^b   Herfkens, Robert J ^a   Jeffrey, R Brooke ^a   Quon, Andrew ^a   Gambhir, Sanjiv S ^a,c  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c Stanford University   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETIC ACID; CAPROMAB PENDETIDE IN 111; CARBON 11; CHOLINE; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DOPA; FIALURIDINE; FLUOROACETIC ACID; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; FLUOROTHYMIDINE; GADOLINIUM; METHIONINE; OCTREOTIDE; PYROPHOSPHATE; SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON OXIDE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

BLADDER CANCER; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; HEAD AND NECK CANCER; HUMAN; KIDNEY CARCINOMA; LIVER CIRRHOSIS; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LYMPHANGIOGRAPHY; LYMPHOMA; MELANOMA; MOLECULAR IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; OVARY CANCER; PANCREAS ADENOCARCINOMA; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; RADIODIAGNOSIS; REVIEW; SARCOIDOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STOMACH CANCER; TESTIS CANCER; WHOLE BODY AUTORADIOGRAPHY;

CONTRAST MEDIA; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; MOLECULAR PROBE TECHNIQUES; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 35348938216     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2452061117     Document Type: Review

References (296)

1. Hoffman JM, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging: the vision and opportunity for radiology in the future. Radiology 2007;244:39-47.
2. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, Silverman DH, Coleman RE, Phelps ME. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med 2001;42(suppl 5):1S-93S.
3. Herder GJ, Golding RP, Hoekstra OS, et al. The performance of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in small solitary pulmonary nodules. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:1231-1236.
4. Line BR, White CS. Positron emission tomography scanning for the diagnosis and management of lung cancer. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2004;5:63-73.
5. Christensen JA, Nathan MA, Mullan BP, Hartman TE, Swensen SJ, Lowe VJ. Characterization of the solitary pulmonary nodule: 18F-FDG PET versus nodule-enhancement CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:1361-1367.
6. MacMahon H, Austin JH, Gamsu G, et al. Guidelines for management of small pulmonary nodules detected on CT scans: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology 2005;237:395-400.
7. Buck AK, Halter G, Schirrmeister H, et al. Imaging proliferation in lung tumors with PET: 18F-FLT versus 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1426-1431.
8. Ries L, Eisner M, Kosary C, et al. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975-2001. Bethesda, Md: National Cancer Institute, 2004.
9. Vansteenkiste JF. PET scan in the staging of non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2003;42(suppl 1):S27-S37.
10. 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.
11. Scott WJ, Shepherd J, Gambhir SS. Cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET for staging non-small cell lung cancer: a decision analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 1998;66:1876-1884.
12. Halpern BS, Schiepers C, Weber WA, et al. Presurgical staging of non-small cell lung cancer: positron emission tomography, integrated positron emission tomography/CT, and software image fusion. Chest 2005;128(4):2289-2297.
13. Shim SS, Lee KS, Kim BT, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: prospective comparison of integrated FDG PET/CT and CT alone for preoperative staging. Radiology 2005;236(3):1011-1019.
14. Cerfolio RJ, Ojha B, Bryant AS, Raghuveer V, Mountz JM, Bartolucci AA. The accuracy of integrated PET-CT compared with dedicated PET alone for the staging of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78(3):1017-1023.
15. Kostakoglu L, Goldsmith SJ. 18F-FDG PET evaluation of the response to therapy for lymphoma and for breast, lung, and colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2003;44:224-239.
16. Hoekstra CJ, Stroobants SG, Smit EF, et al. Prognostic relevance of response evaluation using [18F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(33):8362-8370.
17. Hicks RJ, Mac Manus MP, Matthews JP, et al. Early FDG-PET imaging after radical radiotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer: inflammatory changes in normal tissues correlate with tumor response and do not confound therapeutic response evaluation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;60(2):412-418.
18. Weber WA, Petersen V, Schmidt B, et al. Positron emission tomography in non-small cell lung cancer: prediction of response to chemotherapy by quantitative assessment of glucose use. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:2651-2657.
19. Mac Manus MP, Hicks RJ, Matthews JP, et al. Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography scanning for response-assessment after radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1285-1292.
20. Yap CS, Czernin J, Fishbein MC, et al. Evaluation of thoracic tumors with 18F-fluorothymidine and 18F-flurodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. Chest 2006;129:393-401.
21. Mankoff DA, Shields AF, Krohn KA. PET imaging of cellular proliferation. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43(1):153-167.
22. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG. Positron emission tomography in the management of non-small cell lung cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2004;18:269-288.
23. Vesselle H, Grierson J, Muzi M, et al. In vivo validation of 3′deoxy-3′-[(18)F]fluorothymidine ([(18)F]FLT) as a proliferation imaging tracer in humans: correlation of [(18)F]FLT uptake by positron emission tomography with Ki-67 immunohistochemistry and flow cytometry in human lung tumors. Clin Cancer Res 2002;8:3315-3323.
24. Chen YK, Kao CH, Liao AC, Shen YY, Su CT. Colorectal cancer screening in asymptomatic adults: the role of FDG PET scan. Anticancer Res 2003;23:4357-4361.
25. Langenhoff BS, Oyen WJ, Jager GJ, et al. Efficacy of fluorine-18- deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in detecting tumor recurrence after local ablative therapy for liver metastases: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:4453-4458.
26. Rohren EM, Paulson EK, Hagge R, et al. The role of F-18 FDG positron emission tomography in preoperative assessment of the liver in patients being considered for curative resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2002;27:550-555.
27. Kalff V, Hicks RJ, Ware RE, Hogg A, Binns D, McKenzie AF. The clinical impact of (18)F-FDG PET in patients with suspected or confirmed recurrence of colorectal cancer: a prospective study. J Nucl Med 2002;43:492-499.
28. Abdel-Nabi H, Doerr RJ, Lamonica DM, et al. Staging of primary colorectal carcinomas with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose whole-body PET: correlation with histopathologic and CT findings. Radiology 1998;206:755-760.
29. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J, Wahl RL. Direct comparison of (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1797-1803.
30. Schussler-Fiorenza CM, Mahvi DM, Niederhuber J, Rikkers LF, Weber SM. Clinical risk score correlates with yield of PET scan in patients with colorectal hepatic metastases. J Gastrointest Surg 2004;8:150-157; discussion 157-158.
31. Gualdi GF, Casciani E, Guadalaxara A, d'Orta C, Polettini E, Pappalardo G. Local staging of rectal cancer with transrectal ultrasound and endorectal magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with histologic findings. Dis Colon Rectum 2000;43:338-345.
32. Fuchsjager MH, Maier AG, Schema W, et al. Comparison of transrectal sonography and double-contrast MR imaging when staging rectal cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:421-427.
33. Chung HW, Chung JB, Park SW, Song SY, Kang JK, Park CI. Comparison of hydrocolonic sonograpy accuracy in preoperative staging between colon and rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 2004;10:1157-1161.
34. Schaffzin DM, Wong WD. Endorectal ultrasound in the preoperative evaluation of rectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2004;4:124-132.
35. Harisinghani MG, Saini S, Weissleder R, et al. MR lymphangiography using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide in patients with primary abdominal and pelvic malignancies: radiographic-pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;172:1347-1351.
36. Francis DL, Visvikis D, Costa DC, et al. Potential impact of [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine versus [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose in positron emission tomography for colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:988-994.
37. Visvikis D, Francis D, Mulligan R, et al. Comparison of methodologies for the in vivo assessment of 18FLT utilisation in colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:169-178.
38. Francis DL, Freeman A, Visvikis D, et al. In vivo imaging of cellular proliferation in colorectal cancer using positron emission tomography. Gut 2003;52:1602-1606.
39. Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG, Rudi J. PET-FDG as predictor of therapy response in patients with colorectal carcinoma. Q J Nucl Med 2003;47:8-13.
40. Calvo FA, Domper M, Matute R, et al. 18F-FDG positron emission tomography staging and restaging in rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;58:528-535.
41. Guillem JG, Moore HG, Akhurst T, et al. Sequential preoperative fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography assessment of response to preoperative chemoradiation: a means for determining longterm outcomes of rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg 2004;199:1-7.
42. Wong CY, Salem R, Raman S, Gates VL, Dworkin HJ. Evaluating 90Y-glass microsphere treatment response of unresectable colorectal liver metastases by [18F]FDG PET: a comparison with CT or MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:815-820.
43. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 2004;351:427-437.
44. Agoston AT, Daniel BL, Herfkens RJ, et al. Intensity-modulated parametric mapping for simultaneous display of rapid dynamic and high-spatial-resolution breast MR imaging data. RadioGraphics 2001;21:217-226.
45. Artemov D, Mori N, Ravi R, Bhujwalla ZM. Magnetic resonance molecular imaging of the HER-2/neu receptor. Cancer Res 2003;63:2723-2727.
46. Artemov D, Mori N, Okollie B, Bhujwalla ZM. MR molecular imaging of the Her-2/neu receptor in breast cancer cells using targeted iron oxide nanoparticles. Magn Reson Med 2003;49:403-408.
47. Daldrup-Link HE, Rydland J, Helbich TH, et al. Quantification of breast tumor microvascular permeability with feruglose-enhanced MR imaging: initial phase II multicenter trial. Radiology 2003;229:885-892.
48. Turetschek K, Floyd E, Helbich T, et al. MRI assessment of microvascular characteristics in experimental breast tumors using a new blood pool contrast agent (MS-325) with correlations to histopathology. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;14:237-242.
49. Turetschek K, Roberts TP, Floyd E, et al. Tumor microvascular characterization using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles (USPIO) in an experimental breast cancer model. J Magn Reson Imaging 2001;13:882-888.
50. Turetschek K, Floyd E, Shames DM, et al. Assessment of a rapid clearance blood pool MR contrast medium (P792) for assays of microvascular characteristics in experimental breast tumors with correlations to histopathology. Magn Reson Med 2001;45:880-886.
51. Jacobs MA, Barker PB, Bottomley PA, Bhujwalla Z, Bluemke DA. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging of human breast cancer: a preliminary study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004;19:68-75.
52. Cutler M. Transillumination as an aid in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1929;48:721-729.
53. Ntziachristos V, Chance B. Probing physiology and molecular function using optical imaging: applications to breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2001;3:41-46.
54. Boppart SA, Luo W, Marks DL, Singletary KW. Optical coherence tomography: feasibility for basic research and image-guided surgery of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004;84:85-97.
55. Loo C, Lin A, Hirsch L, et al. Nanoshell-enabled photonics-based imaging and therapy of cancer. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2004;3:33-40.
56. Sokolov K, Follen M, Aaron J, et al. Real-time vital optical imaging of precancer using anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies conjugated to gold nanoparticles. Cancer Res 2003;63:1999-2004.
57. Bremer C, Ntziachristos V, Weissleder R. Optical-based molecular imaging: contrast agents and potential medical applications. Eur Radiol 2003;13:231-243.
58. Gurfinkel M, Ke S, Wen X, Li C, Sevick-Muraca EM. Near-infrared fluorescence optical imaging and tomography. Dis Markers 2003;19:107-121.
59. Godavarty A, Eppstein MJ, Zhang C, et al. Fluorescence-enhanced optical imaging in large tissue volumes using a gain-modulated ICCD camera. Phys Med Biol 2003;48:1701-1720.
60. Hawrysz DJ, Sevick-Muraca EM. Developments toward diagnostic breast cancer imaging using near-infrared optical measurements and fluorescent contrast agents. Neoplasia 2000;2:388-417.
61. Godavarty A, Thompson AB, Roy R, et al. Diagnostic imaging of breast cancer using fluorescence-enhanced optical tomography: phantom studies. J Biomed Opt 2004;9:488-496.
62. Lenkinski RE, Ahmed M, Zaheer A, Frangioni JV, Goldberg SN. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging of microcalcification in an animal model of breast cancer. Acad Radiol 2003;10:1159-1164.
63. Walter C, Scheidhauer K, Scharl A, et al. Clinical and diagnostic value of preoperative MR mammography and FDG-PET in suspicious breast lesions. Eur Radiol 2003;13:1651-1656.
64. Wahl RL, Cody RL, Hutchins GD, Mudgett EE. Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabeled glucose analogue 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology 1991;179:765-770.
65. Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: use and limitations. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3495-3502.
66. Adler LP, Crowe JP, al-Kaisi NK, Sunshine JL. Evaluation of breast masses and axillary lymph nodes with [F-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose PET. Radiology 1993;187:743-750.
67. Wahl RL, Siegel BA, Coleman RE, Gatsonis CG. Prospective multicenter study of axillary nodal staging by positron emission tomography in breast cancer: a report of the staging breast cancer wih PET study group. PET Study Group. J Clin Oncol 2004;22(2):277-285.
68. Crippa F, Agresti R, Seregni E, et al. Prospective evaluation of fluorine-18-FDG PET in presurgical staging of the axilla in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 1998;39:4-8.
69. Utech CI, Young CS, Winter PF. Prospective evaluation of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyclucose positron emission tomography in breast cancer for staging of the axilla related to surgery and immunocytochemistry. Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23:1588-1593.
70. van der Hoeven JJ, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, et al. 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d- glucose positron emission tomography in staging of locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1253-1259.
71. Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ, Kao CH, Lin CC, Lee CC. Comparing whole body (18)F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography and technetium-99m methylene diphosphonate bone scan to detect bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2002;128:325-328.
72. Siggelkow W, Zimny M, Faridi A, Petzold K, Buell U, Rath W. The value of positron emission tomography in the follow-up for breast cancer. Anticancer Res 2003;23:1859-1867.
73. Vranjesevic D, Filmont JE, Meta J, et al. Whole-body (18)F-FDG PET and conventional imaging for predicting outcome in previously treated breast cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2002;43:325-329.
74. Moon DH, Maddahi J, Silverman DH, Glaspy JA, Phelps ME, Hoh CK. Accuracy of whole-body fluorine-18-FDG PET for the detection of recurrent or metastatic breast carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1998;39:431-435.
75. Smyczek-Gargya B, Fersis N, Dittmann H, et al. PET with [18F]fluorothymidine for imaging of primary breast cancer: a pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:720-724.
76. Rieber A, Schirrmeister H, Gabelmann A, et al. Pre-operative staging of invasive breast cancer with MR mammography and/or PET: boon or bunk? Br J Radiol 2002;75:789-798.
77. Heinisch M, Gallowitsch HJ, Mikosch P, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in the evaluation of suggestive breast lesions. Breast 2003;12:17-22.
78. Michel SC, Keller TM, Frohlich JM, et al. Preoperative breast cancer staging: MR imaging of the axilla with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide enhancement. Radiology 2002;225:527-536.
79. Martincich L, Montemurro F, De Rosa G, et al. Monitoring response to primary chemotherapy in breast cancer using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2004;83:67-76.
80. Wasser K, Klein SK, Fink C, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant chemotherapeutic response of breast cancer using dynamic MRI with high temporal resolution. Eur Radiol 2003;13:80-87.
81. Hayes C, Padhani AR, Leach MO. Assessing changes in tumour vascular function using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. NMR Biomed 2002;15:154-163.
82. Gennari A, Donati S, Salvadori B, et al. Role of 2-[18F]- fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in the early assessment of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients. Clin Breast Cancer 2000;1:156-161; discussion 162-163.
83. Krak NC, van der Hoeven JJ, Hoekstra OS. Twisk JW, van der Wall E, Lammertsma AA. Measuring [(18)F]FDG uptake in breast cancer during chemotherapy: comparison of analytical methods. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:674-681.
84. Mankoff DA, Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, et al. Changes in blood flow and metabolism in locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1806-1814.
85. Kelloff GJ, Hoffman JM, Johnson B, et al. Progress and promise of FDG-PET imaging for cancer patient management and oncologic drug development. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11(8):2785-2808.
86. Macapinlac HA, Humm JL, Akhurst T, et al. Differential metabolism and pharmacokinetics of L-[1-(11)C]-methionine and 2-[(18)F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose (FDG) in androgen independent prostate cancer. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2(3):173-181.
87. Sung J, Espiritu JI, Segall GM, Terris MK. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography studies in the diagnosis and staging of clinically advanced prostate cancer. BJU Int 2003;92:24-27.
88. Salminen E, Hogg A, Binns D, Frydenberg M, Hicks R. Investigations with FDG-PET scanning in prostate cancer show limited value for clinical practice. Acta Oncol 2002;41:425-429.
89. Oyama N, Akino H, Suzuki Y, et al. FDG PET for evaluating the change of glucose metabolism in prostate cancer after androgen ablation. Nucl Med Commun 2001;22:963-969.
90. Costello LC, Franklin RB. Citrate metabolism of normal and malignant prostate epithelial cells. Urology 1997;50:3-12.
91. Oyama N, Miller TR, Dehdashti F, et al. 11C-acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer: detection of recurrent disease at PSA relapse. J Nucl Med 2003;44:549-555.
92. Kotzerke J, Volkmer BG, Glatting G, et al. Intraindividual comparison of [11C]acetate and [11C]choline PET for detection of metastases of prostate cancer. Nuklearmedizin 2003;42:25-30.
93. Fricke E, Machtens S, Hofmann M, et al. Positron emission tomography with 11C-acetate and 18F-FDG in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:607-611.
94. Kato T, Tsukamoto E, Kuge Y, et al. Accumulation of [11C]acetate in normal prostate and benign prostatic hyperplasia: comparison with prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1492-1495.
95. Nunez R, Macapinlac HA, Yeung HW, et al. Combined 18F-FDG and 11C-methionine PET scans in patients with newly progressive metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2002;43:46-55.
96. de Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Vaalburg W, Mensink HJ. 11C-choline positron emission tomography for the evaluation after treatment of localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2003;44:32-38; discussion 38-39.
97. Picchio M, Messa C, Landoni C, et al. Value of [11C]choline-positron emission tomography for re-staging prostate cancer: a comparison with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. J Urol 2003;169:1337-1340.
98. de Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Vaalburg W, Mensink HJ. Preoperative staging of pelvic lymph nodes in prostate cancer by 11C-choline PET. J Nucl Med 2003;44:331-335.
99. Hara T, Kosaka N, Kishi H. PET imaging of prostate cancer using carbon-11-choline. J Nucl Med 1998;39:990-995.
100. Hara T, Kosaka N, Kishi H. Development of (18)F-fluoroethylcholine for cancer imaging with PET: synthesis, biochemistry, and prostate cancer imaging. J Nucl Med 2002;43:187-199.
101. Price DT, Coleman RE, Liao RP, Robertson CN, Polascik TJ, DeGrado TR. Comparison of [18 F]fluorocholine and [18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose for positron emission tomography of androgen dependent and androgen independent prostate cancer. J Urol 2002;168:273-280.
102. Kwee SA, Coel MN, Lim J, Ko JP. Prostate cancer localization with 18fluorine fluorocholine positron emission tomography. J Urol 2005;173:252-253.
103. Purohit RS, Shinohara K, Meng MV, Carroll PR. Imaging clinically localized prostate cancer. Urol Clin North Am 2003;30:279-293.
104. Coakley FV, Qayyum A, Kurhanewicz J. Magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopic imaging of prostate cancer. J Urol 2003;170(6 pt 2):S69-S75; discussion S75-S76.
105. Swindle P, McCredie S, Russell P, et al. Pathologic characterization of human prostate tissue with proton MR spectroscopy. Radiology 2003;228:144-151.
106. Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, Laheij RJ, Verbeek AL, van Lier HJ, Barentsz JO. Local staging of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2002;12:2294-2302.
107. Ackerstaff E, Pflug BR, Nelson JB, Bhujwalla ZM. Detection of increased choline compounds with proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy subsequent to malignant transformation of human prostatic epithelial cells. Cancer Res 2001;61:3599-3603.
108. Coakley FV, Kurhanewicz J, Lu Y, et al. Prostate cancer tumor volume: measurement with endorectal MR and MR spectroscopic imaging. Radiology 2002;223:91-97.
109. Yue K, Marumoto A, Binesh N, Thomas MA. 2D JPRESS of human prostates using an endorectal receiver coil. Magn Reson Med 2002;47:1059-1064.
110. Swanson MG, Vigneron DB, Tran TK, Sailasuta N, Hurd RE, Kurhanewicz J. Single-voxel oversampled J-resolved spectroscopy of in vivo human prostate tissue. Magn Reson Med 2001;45:973-980.
111. Swanson MG, Vigneron DB, Tabatabai ZL, et al. Proton HR-MAS spectroscopy and quantitative pathologic analysis of MRI/3D-MRSI-targeted postsurgical prostate tissues. Magn Reson Med 2003;50:944-954.
112. Schricker AA, Pauly JM, Kurhanewicz J, Swanson MG, Vigneron DB. Dualband spectral-spatial RF pulses for prostate MR spectroscopic imaging. Magn Reson Med 2001;46:1079-1087.
113. Kaji Y, Wada A, Imaoka I, et al. Proton two-dimensional chemical shift imaging for evaluation of prostate cancer: external surface coil vs. endorectal surface coil. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16:697-706.
114. Kim HW, Buckley DL, Peterson DM, et al. In vivo prostate magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance spectroscopy at 3 Tesla using a transceive pelvic phased array coil: preliminary results. Invest Radiol 2003;38:443-451.
115. Menard C, Smith IC, Somorjai RL, et al. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the malignant prostate gland after radiotherapy: a histopathologic study of diagnostic validity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;50:317-323.
116. DiBiase SJ, Hosseinzadeh K, Gullapalli RP, et al. Magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging-guided brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;52:429-438.
117. Mueller-Lisse UG, Vigneron DB, Hricak H, et al. Localized prostate cancer: effect of hormone deprivation therapy measured by using combined three-dimensional 1H MR spectroscopy and MR imaging - clinicopathologic case-controlled study. Radiology 2001;221:380-390.
118. Mueller-Lisse UG, Swanson MG, Vigneron DB, et al. Time-dependent effects of hormone-deprivation therapy on prostate metabolism as detected by combined magnetic resonance imaging and 3D magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. Magn Reson Med 2001;46:49-57.
119. Kurhanewicz J, Swanson MG, Wood PJ, Vigneron DB. Magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopic imaging: improved patient selection and potential for metabolic intermediate endpoints in prostate cancer chemoprevention trials. Urology 2001;57:124-128.
120. Zakian KL, Eberhardt S, Hricak H, et al. Transition zone prostate cancer: metabolic characteristics at 1II MR spectroscopic imaging - initial results. Radiology 2003;229:241-247.
121. Harisinghani MG, Barentsz J, Hahn PF, et al. Noninvasive detection of clinically occult lymph-node metastases in prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2491-2499.
122. Daldrup-Link HE, Kaiser A, Helbich T, et al. Macromolecular contrast medium (feruglose) versus small molecular contrast medium (gadopentetate) enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: differentiation of benign and malignant breast lesions. Acad Radiol 2003;10:1237-1246.
123. Rosenthal SA, Haseman MK, Polascik TJ. Utility of capromab pendetide (ProstaScint) imaging in the management of prostate cancer. Tech Urol 2001;7:27-37.
124. Bander NH, Trabulsi EJ, Kostakoglu L, et al. Targeting metastatic prostate cancer with radiolabeled monoclonal antibody J591 to the extracellular domain of prostate specific membrane antigen. J Urol 2003;170:1717-1721.
125. 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.
126. Rodriguez M, Rehn S, Ahlstrom H, Sundstrom C, Glimelius B. Predicting malignancy grade with PET in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. J Nucl Med 1995;36:1790-1796.
127. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Najjar F, et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) for the staging of low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Ann Oncol 2001;12:825-830.
128. Hoffmann M, Kletter K, Diemling M, et al. Positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (F18-FDG) does not visualize extranodal B-cell lymphoma of the mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT)-type. Ann Oncol 1999;10:1185-1189.
129. Stumpe KD, Urbinelli M, Steinert HC, Glanzmann C, Buck A, von Schulthess GK. Whole-body positron emission tomography using fluorodeoxyglucose for staging of lymphoma: effectiveness and comparison with computed tomography. Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25:721-728.
130. Moog F, Bangerter M, Diederichs CG, et al. Lymphoma: role of whole-body 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) PET in nodal staging. Radiology 1997;203:795-800.
131. Kostakoglu L, Leonard JP, Kuji I, Coleman M, Vallabhajosula S, Goldsmith SJ, Comparison of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and Ga-67 scintigraphy in evaluation of lymphoma. Cancer 2002;94:879-888.
132. Filmont JE, Vranjesevic D, Quon A, et al. Conventional imaging and 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography for predicting the clinical outcome of previously treated non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients. Mol Imaging Biol 2003;5:232-239.
133. Cremerius U, Fabry U, Kroll U, et al. Clinical value of FDG PET for therapy monitoring of malignant lymphoma: results of a retrospective study in 72 patients. Nuklearmedizin 1999;38:24-30.
134. Griffiths JR, Tate AR, Howe FA, Stubbs M. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy of cancer: practicalities of multi-centre trials and early results in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Eur J Cancer 2002;38:2085-2093.
135. McMillan JH, Levine E, Stephens RH. Computed tomography in the evaluation of metastatic adenocarcinoma from an unknown primary site: a retrospective study. Radiology 1982;143:143-146.
136. Scott CL, Kubaba I, Stewart JM, Hicks RJ, Rischin D. The utility of 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the investigation of patients with disseminated carcinoma of unknown primary origin. Mol Imaging Biol 2005;7(3):236-243.
137. Lonneux M, Reffad A. Metastases from unknown primary tumor: PET-FDG as initial diagnostic procedure? Clin Positron Imaging 2000;3:137-141.
138. Bohuslavizki KH, Klutmann S, Kroger S, et al. FDG PET detection of unknown primary tumors. J Nucl Med 2000;41:816-822.
139. Lassen U, Daugaard G, Eigtved A, Damgaard K, Friberg L. 18F-FDG whole body positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with unknown primary tumours (UPT). Eur J Cancer 1999;35:1076-1082.
140. Dale PS, Foshag LJ, Wanek LA, Morton DL. Metastasis of primary melanoma to two separate lymph node basins: prognostic significance. Ann Surg Oncol 1997;4:13-18.
141. Klein M, Freedman N, Lotem M, et al. Contribution of whole body F-18-FDG-PET and lymphoscintigraphy to the assessment of regional and distant metastases in cutaneous malignant melanoma: a pilot study. Nuklearmedizin 2000;39:56-61.
142. Wagner JD, Schauwecker D, Davidson D, et al. Inefficacy of F-18 fluorodeoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography scans for initial evaluation in early-stage cutaneous melanoma. Cancer 2005;104(3):570-579.
143. Wagner JD, Schauwecker D, Davidson D, 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;17:1508-1515.
144. Wagner JD, Schauwecker DS, Davidson D, Wenck S, Jung SH, Hutchins G. FDG-PET sensitivity for melanoma lymph node metastases is dependent on tumor volume. J Surg Oncol 2001;77:237-242.
145. Schwimmer J, Essner R, Patel A, et al. A review of the literature for whole-body FDG PET in the management of patients with melanoma. Q J Nucl Med 2000;44:153-167.
146. Finkelstein SE, Carrasquillo JA, Hoffman JM, et al. A prospective analysis of positron emission tomography and conventional imaging for detection of stage IV metastatic melanoma in patients undergoing metastasectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 2004;11(8):731-738.
147. Sigg MB, Steinert H, Gratz K, Hugenin P, Stoeckli S, Klaus E. Staging head and neck tumors: [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography compared with physical examination and conventional imaging modalities. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003;61:1022-1029.
148. Nowak B, Di Martino E, Janicke S, et al. Diagnostic evaluation of malignant head and neck cancer by F-18-FDG PET compared to CT/MRI. Nuklearmedizin 1999;38:312-318.
149. Schoder H, Yeung HW, Gonen M, Kraus D, Larson SM. Head and neck cancer: clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology 2004;231:65-72.
150. Branstetter BF, Blodgett TM, Zimmer LA, et al. Head and neck malignancy: is PET/CT more accurate than PET or CT alone? Radiology 2005;235:580-586.
151. Anzai Y, Piccoli CW, Outwater EK, et al. Evaluation of neck and body metastases to nodes with ferumoxtran 10-enhanced MR imaging: phase III safety and efficacy study. Radiology 2003;228:777-788.
152. Sigal R, Vogl T, Casselman J, et al. Lymph node metastases from head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: MR imaging with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles (Sincrem MR) - results of a phase-III multicenter clinical trial. Eur Radiol 2002;12:1104-1113.
153. Mack MG, Balzer JO, Straub R, Eichler K, Vogl TJ. Superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging of head and neck lymph nodes. Radiology 2002;222:239-244.
154. Hoffman HT, Quets J, Toshiaki T, et al. Functional magnetic resonance imaging using iron oxide particles in characterizing head and neck adenopathy. Laryngoscope 2000;110:1425-1430.
155. Anzai Y, Blackwell KE, Hirschowitz SL, et al. Initial clinical experience with dextran-coated superparamagnetic iron oxide for detection of lymph node metastases in patients with head and neck cancer. Radiology 1994;192:709-715.
156. Greven KM, Williams DW 3rd, McGuirt WF Sr, et al. Serial positron emission tomography scans following radiation therapy of patients with head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2001;23:942-946.
157. Jereczek-Fossa BA, Jassem J, Orecchia R. Cervical lymph node metastases of squamous cell carcinoma from an unknown primary. Cancer Treat Rev 2004;30:153-164.
158. Wong WL, Saunders M. The impact of FDG PET on the management of occult primary head and neck tumours. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2003;15:461-466.
159. Fogarty GB, Peters LJ, Stewart J, Scott C, Rischin D, Hicks RJ. The usefulness of fluorine 18-labelled deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the investigation of patients with cervical lymphadenopathy from an unknown primary tumor. Head Neck 2003;25:138-145.
160. Regelink G, Brouwer J, de Bree R, et al. Detection of unknown primary tumours and distant metastases in patients with cervical metastases: value of FDG-PET versus conventional modalities. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1024-1030.
161. Jungehulsing M, Scheidhauer K, Damm M, et al. 2[F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography is a sensitive tool for the detection of occult primary cancer (carcinoma of unknown primary syndrome) with head and neck lymph node manifestation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;123:294-301.
162. Greven KM, Keyes JW Jr, Williams DW 3rd, McGuirt WF, Joyce WT 3rd. Occult primary tumors of the head and neck: lack of benefit from positron emission tomography imaging with 2-[F-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Cancer
163. Kresnik E, Mikosch P, Gallowitsch HJ, et al. Evaluation of head and neck cancer with 18F-FDG PET: a comparison with conventional methods. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:816-821.
164. Lerut T, Flamen P, Ectors N, et al. Histopathologic validation of lymph node staging with FDG-PET scan in cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction: a prospective study based on primary surgery with extensive lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg 2000;232:743-752.
165. Kole AC, Plukker JT, Nieweg OE, Vaalburg W. Positron emission tomography for staging of oesophageal and gastroesophageal malignancy. Br J Cancer 1998;78:521-527.
166. Blackstock AW, Farmer MR, Lovato J, et al. A prospective evaluation of the impact of 18-F-fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography staging on survival for patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;64(2):455-460.
167. Levine EA, Farmer MR, Clark P, et al. Predictive value of 18-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) in the identification of responders to chemoradiation therapy for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Ann Surg 2006;243:472-478.
168. Swisher SG, Erasmus J, Marsh M, et al. 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography imaging is predictive of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer 2004;101:1776-1785.
169. Wieder HA, Brucher BL, Zimmermann F, et al. Time course of tumor metabolic activity during chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and response to treatment. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:900-908.
170. Weber WA, Ott K, Becker K, et al. Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in adenocarcinoma of the esophogastric junction by metabolic imaging. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3058-3065.
171. Frilling A, Tecklenborg K, Gorges R, Weber F, Clausen M, Broelsch EC. Preoperative diagnostic value of [(18)F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with radioiodine-negative recurrent well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma. Ann Surg 2001;234:804-811.
172. Stokkel MP, Duchateau CSJ, Dragoiescu C. The value of FDG-PET in the followup of differentiated thyroid cancer: a review of the literature. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;50(1):78-87.
173. Palmedo H, Bucerius J, Joe A, et al. Integrated PET/CT in differentiated thyroid cancer: diagnostic accuracy and impact on patient management. J Nucl Med 2006;47(4):616-624.
174. Kim S, Chung JK, Kang SB, et al. [18F]FDG PET as a substitute for second-look laparotomy in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31(2):196-201.
175. Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kawahara K, et al. Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;182:227-233.
176. Torizuka T, Nobezawa S, Kanno T, et al. Ovarian cancer recurrence: role of whole-body positron emission tomography using 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy- D-glucose. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:797-803.
177. Kawahara K, Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, et al. Evaluation of positron emission tomography with tracer 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in addition to magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in selected women after ultrasonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004;28:505-516.
178. Pannu HK, Cohade C, Bristow RE, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. PET-CT detection of abdominal recurrence of ovarian cancer: radiologic-surgical correlation. Abdom Imaging 2004;29:398-403.
179. Drieskens O, Stroobants S, Gysen M, Vandenbosch G, Mortelmans L, Vergote I. Positron emission tomography with FDG in the detection of peritoneal and retroperitoneal metastases of ovarian cancer. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2003;55:130-134.
180. Cho SM, Ha HK, Byun JY, Lee JM, Kim CJ, Nam-Koong SE. Usefulness of FDG PET for assessment of early recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:391-395.
181. Murakami M, Miyamoto T, Iida T, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography and tumor marker CA 125 for prediction of recurrence in epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16(suppl 1):99-107.
182. Takekuma M, Maeda M, Ozawa T, Yasumi K, Torizuka T. Positron emission tomography with 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose for the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2005;10(3):177-181.
183. Nanni C, Rubello D, Farsad M, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of recurrent ovarian cancer: a prospective study on forty-one patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 2005;31(7):792-797.
184. Subhas N, Patel PV, Pannu HK, Jacene HA, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Imaging of pelvic malignancies with in-line FDG PET-CT: case examples and common pitfalls of FDG-PET. RadioGraphics 2005;25(4):1031-1043.
185. Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, et al. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(30):7445-7453.
186. Spermon JR, De Geus-Oei LF, Kiemeney LA, Witjes JA, Oyen WJ. The role of (18)fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in initial staging and restaging after chemotherapy for testicular genu cell tumours. BJU Int 2002;89:549-556.
187. Hain SF, O'Doherty MJ, Timothy AR, Leslie MD, Partridge SE, Huddart RA. Fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the initial staging of germ cell tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27:590-594.
188. Cremerius U, Wildberger JE, Borchers H, et al. Does positron emission tomography using 18-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose improve clinical staging of testicular cancer? results of a study in 50 patients. Urology 1999;54:900-904.
189. Lassen U, Daugaard G, Eigtved A, Hojgaard L, Damgaard K, Rorth M. Whole-body FDG-PET in patients with stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:396-402.
190. Sanchez D, Zudaire JJ, Fernandez JM, et al. 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose- positron emission tomography in the evaluation of nonseminomatous germ cell tumours at relapse. BJU Int 2002;89:912-916.
191. Hain SF, O'Doherty MJ, Timothy AR, Leslie MD, Harper PG, Huddart RA. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of germ cell tumours at relapse. Br J Cancer 2000;83:863-869.
192. De Santis M, Becherer A, Bokemeyer C, et al. 2-18fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is a reliable predictor for viable tumor in postchemotherapy seminoma: an update of the prospective multicentric SEMPET trial. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1034-1039.
193. Becherer A, DeSantis M, Karanikas G, et al. FDG PET is superior to CT in the prediction of viable tumour in post-chemotherapy seminoma residuals. Eur J Radiol 2005;54(2):284-288.
194. Bokemeyer C, Kollmannsberger C, Oechsle K, et al. Early prediction of treatment response to high-dose salvage chemotherapy in patients with relapsed germ cell cancer using [18F] FDG PET. Br J Cancer 2002;86:506-511.
195. Karapetis CS, Strickland AH, Yip D, van der Walt JD, Harper PG. PET and PLAP in suspected testicular cancer relapse: beware sarcoidosis. Ann Oncol 2001;12:1485-1488.
196. Muggia FM, Conti PS. Seminoma and sarcoidosis: a cause for false positive mediastinal uptake in PET? Ann Oncol 1998;9:924.
197. Kumar R, Chauhan A, Lakhani P, Xiu Y, Zhuang H, Alavi A. 2-Deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography in characterization of solid renal masses. Mol Imaging Biol 2005;7(60):431-439.
198. Aide N, Cappele O, Bottet P, et al. Efficiency of [(18)F] FDG PET in characterising renal cancer and detecting distant metastases: a comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30(9):1236-1245.
199. Safaei A, Figlin R, Hoh CK, et al. The usefulness of F-18 deoxyglucose whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) for re-staging of renal cell cancer. Clin Nephrol 2002;57:56-62.
200. Jadvar H, Kherbache HM, Pinski JK, Conti PS. Diagnostic role of [F-18]-FDG positron emission tomography in rest aging renal cell carcinoma. Clin Nephrol 2003;60:395-400.
201. Kang DE, White RL Jr, Zuger JH, Sasser HC, Teigland CM. Clinical use of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography for detection of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 2004;171:1806-1809.
202. Majhail NS, Urbain JL, Albani JM, et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of distant metastases from renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:3995-4000.
203. Szabo Z, Xia J, Mathews WB, Brown PR. Future direction of renal positron emission tomography. Semin Nucl Med 2006;36(1):36-50.
204. Hofer C, Kubler H, Hartung R, Breul J, Avril N. Diagnosis and monitoring of urological tumors using positron emission tomography. Eur Urol 2001;40:481-487.
205. Kosuda S, Kison PV, Greenough R, Grossman HB, Wahl RL. Preliminary assessment of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with bladder cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24:615-620.
206. de Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Jongen MM, Mensink HJ, Vaalburg W. Visualisation of bladder cancer using (11)C-choline PET: first clinical experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1283-1288.
207. Narayan K, McKenzie AF, Hicks RJ, Fisher R, Berushaw D, Bau S. Relation between FIGO stage, primary tumor volume, and presence of lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients referred for radiotherapy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2003;13:657-663.
208. Unger JB, Ivy JJ, Connor P, et al. Detection of recurrent cervical cancer by whole-body FDG PET scan in asymptomatic and symptomatic women. Gynecol Oncol 2004;94:212-216.
209. Chang TC, Law KS, Hong JH, et al. Positron emission tomography for unexplained elevation of serum squamous cell carcinoma antigen levels during follow-up for patients with cervical malignancies: a phase II study. Cancer 2004;101:164-171.
210. Wong TZ, Jones EL, Coleman RE. Positron emission tomography with 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]fluoro-D-glucose for evaluating local and distant disease in patients with cervical cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2004;6:55-62.
211. Ryu SY, Kim MH, Choi SC, Choi CW, Lee KH. Detection of early recurrence with 18F-FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 2003;44:347-352.
212. Rose PG, Adler LP, Rodriguez M, Faulhaber PF, Abdul-Karim FW, Miraldi F. Positron emission tomography for evaluating para-aortic nodal metastasis in locally advanced cervical cancer before surgical staging: a surgicopathologic study. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:41-45.
213. Nakamoto Y, Eisbruch A, Achtyes ED, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography using F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Gynecol Oncol 2002;84:289-295.
214. Wright JD, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, et al. Preoperative lymph node staging of early-stage cervical carcinoma by [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography. Cancer 2005;104(11):2484-2491.
215. Lai CH, Huang KG, See LC, et al. Restaging of recurrent cervical carcinoma with dual-phase [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography. Cancer 2004;100:544-552.
216. Tsai CS, Chang TC Lai CH, et al. Preliminary report of using FDG-PET to detect extrapelvic lesions in cervical cancer patients with enlarged pelvic lymph nodes on MRI/CT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;58:1506-1512.
217. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Rader J, Zoberi I. Posttherapy [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in carcinoma of the cervix: response and outcome. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2167-2171.
218. Narayan K, Hicks RJ, Jobling T, Bernshaw D, McKenzie AF. A comparison of MRI and PET scanning in surgically staged loco-regionally advanced cervical cancer: potential impact on treatment. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2001;11:263-271.
219. Mertz HR, Sechopoulos P, Delbeke D, Leach SD. EUS, PET, and CT scanning for evaluation of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 2000;52:367-371.
220. Delbeke D, Rose DM, Chapman WC, et al. Optimal interpretation of FDG PET in the diagnosis, staging and management of pancreatic carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1784-1791.
221. Rose DM, Delbeke D, Beauchamp RD, et al. 18Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the management of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 1999;229:729-737; discussion 737-738.
222. Keogan MT, Tyler D, Clark L, et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma: role of FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:1565-1570.
223. 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(2):235-243.
224. Saisho H, Yamaguchi T. Diagnostic imaging for pancreatic cancer: computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Pancreas 2004;28:273-278.
225. Jadvar H, Fischman AJ. Evaluation of pancreatic carcinoma with FDG PET. Abdom Imaging 2001;26:254-259.
226. Maisey NR, Webb A, Flux GD, et al. FDG-PET in the prediction of survival of patients with cancer of the pancreas: a pilot study. Br J Cancer 2000;83:287-293.
227. Sperti C, Pasquali C, Chierichetti F, Ferronato A, Decet G, Pedrazzoli S. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in predicting survival of patients with pancreatic carcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 2003;7:953-959; discussion 959-960.
228. Nakata B, Nishimura S, Ishikawa T, et al. Prognostic predictive value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for patients with pancreatic cancer. Int J Oncol 2001;19:53-58.
229. Nakata B, Chung YS, Nishimura S, et al. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and the prognosis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Cancer 1997;79:695-699.
230. Zimny M, Bares R, Fass J, et al. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma: a report of 106 cases. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24:678-682.
231. Stollfuss JC, Glatting G, Friess H, Kocher F, Berger HG, Reske SN. 2-(fluorine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET in detection of pancreatic cancer: value of quantitative image interpretation. Radiology 1995;195:339-344.
232. van Kouwen MC, Jansen JB, van Goor H, de Castro S, Oyen WJ, Drenth JP. FDG-PET is able to detect pancreatic carcinoma in chronic pancreatitis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32(4);399-404.
233. Ruf J, Lopez Hanninen E, Oettle H et al. Detection of recurrent pancreatic cancer: comparison of FDG-PET PET with CT/MRI. Pancreatology 2005;5(2-3):266-272.
234. Bradley JD, Dehdashti F, Mintun MA, Govindan R, Trinkaus K, Siegel BA. Positron emission tomography in limited-stage small-cell lung cancer: a prospective study. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:3248-3254.
235. Blum R, MacManus MP, Rischin D, Michael M, Ball D, Hicks RJ. Impact of positron emission tomography on the management of patients with small-cell lung cancer: preliminary experience. Am J Clin Oncol 2004;27:164-171.
236. Kamel EM, Zwahlen D, Wyss MT, Stumpe KD, von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC. Whole-body (18)F-FDG PET improves the management of patients with small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1911-1917.
237. Zhao DS, Valdivia AY, Li Y, Blaufox MD. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in small-cell lung cancer. Semin Nucl Med 2002;32:272-275.
238. Shen YY, Shiau YC, Wang JJ, Ho ST, Kao CH. Whole-body 18F-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in primary staging small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res 2002;22:1257-1264.
239. Chin R Jr, McCain TW, Miller AA, et al. Whole body FDG-PET for the evaluation and staging of small cell lung cancer: a preliminary study. Lung Cancer 2002;37:1-6.
240. Schumacher T, Brink I, Mix M, et al. FDG-PET imaging for the staging and follow-up of small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:483-488.
241. Pandit N, Conen M, Krug L, Larson SM. Prognostic value of [18F]FDG-PET imaging in small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:78-84.
242. Crotty E, Patz EF Jr. FDG-PET imaging in patients with paraneoplastic syndromes and suspected small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Imaging 2001;16:89-93.
243. Eriksson B, Bergstrom M, Sundin A, et al. The role of PET in localization of neuroendocrine and adrenocortical tumors. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2002;970:159-169.
244. Sundin A, Eriksson B, Bergstrom M, Langstrom B, Oberg K, Orlefors H. PET in the diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumors. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004;1014:246-257.
245. Orlefors H, Sundin A, Ahlstrom H, et al. Positron emission tomography with 5-hydroxytryprophan in neuroendocrine tumors. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:2534-2541.
246. Anderson CJ, Dehdashti F, Cutler PD, et al. 64Cu-TETA-octreotide as a PET imaging agent for patients with neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med 2001;42:213-221.
247. Becherer A, Szabo M, Karanikas G, et al. Imaging of advanced neuroendocrine tumors with (18)F-FDOPA PET. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1161-1167.
248. Jacob T, Grahek D, Younsi N, et al. Positron emission tomography with [(18)F]FDOPA and [(18)F]FDG in the imaging of small cell lung carcinoma: preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:1266-1269.
249. Pasquali C, Rubello D, Sperti C, et al. Neuroendocrine tumor imaging: can 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography detect tumors with poor prognosis and aggressive behavior? World J Surg 1998;22:588-592.
250. Wudel LJ Jr, Delbecke D, Morris D, et al. The role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Am Surg 2003;69(2):117-124.
251. Ho CL, Yu SC, Yeung DW. 11C-acetate PET imaging in hepatocellular carcinoma and other liver masses. J Nucl Med 2003;44:213-221.
252. Bohm B, Voth M, Geoghegan J, et al. Impact of positron emission tomography on strategy in liver resection for primary and secondary liver tumors. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004;130(5):266-272.
253. Lee JM, Kim IH, Kwak HS, Youk JH, Han YM, Kim CS. Detection of small hypervascular hepatocellular carcinomas in cirrhotic patients: comparison of superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced MR imaging with dual-phase spiral CT. Korean J Radiol 2003;4:1-8.
254. Mori K, Yoshioka H, Itai Y, et al. Arterioportal shunts in cirrhotic patients: evaluation of the difference between tumorous and nontumorous arterioportal shunts on MR imaging with superparamagnetic iron oxide. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:1659-1664.
255. Tanimoto A, Yuasa Y, Shinmoto H, et al. Superparamagnetic iron oxide-mediated hepatic signal intensity change in patients with and without cirrhosis: pulse sequence effects and Kupffer cell function. Radiology 2002;222:661-666.
256. Elizondo G, Weissleder R, Stark DD, et al. Hepatic cirrhosis and hepatitis: MR imaging enhanced with superparamagnetic iron oxide. Radiology 1990;174:797-801.
257. Corbin IR, Ryner LN, Singh H, Minuk GY. Quantitative hepatic phosphorus-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy in compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2004;287:G379-G384.
258. Menon DK, Sargentoni J, Taylor-Robinson SD, et al. Effect of functional grade and etiology on in vivo hepatic phosphorus-31 magnetic resonance spectroscopy in cirrhosis: biochemical basis of spectral appearances. Hepatology 1995;21:417-427.
259. McCauley TR, Rifkin MD, Ledet CA. Pelvic lymph node visualization with MR imaging using local administration of ultra-small superparamagnetic iron oxide contrast. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;15:492-497.
260. Pannu HK, Wang KP, Borman TL, Bluemke DA. MR imaging of mediastinal lymph nodes: evaluation using a superparamagnetic contrast agent. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:899-904.
261. Nguyen BC, Stanford W, Thompson BH, et al. Multicenter clinical trial of ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide in the evaluation of mediastinal lymph nodes in patients with primary lung carcinoma. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:468-473.
262. Bellin MF, Roy C, Kinkel K, et al. Lymph node metastases: safety and effectiveness of MR imaging with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide particles - initial clinical experience. Radiology 1998;207:799-808.
263. Harisinghani MG, Saini S, Hahn PF, Weissleder R, Mueller PR. MR imaging of lymph nodes in patients with primary abdominal and pelvic malignancies using ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide (Combidex). Acad Radiol 1998;5(suppl 1):S167-S169, discussion S183-S184.
264. Weissleder R, Elizondo G, Wittenberg J. Rabito CA, Bengele HH, Josephson L. Ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide: characterization of a new class of contrast agents for MR imaging. Radiology 1990;175:489-493.
265. Bakheet SM, Saleem M, Powe J, Al-Amro A, Larsson SG, Mahassin Z. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose chest uptake in lung inflammation and infection. Clin Nucl Med 2000;25:273-278.
266. Zhuang H, Yu JQ, Alavi A. Applications of fluorodeoxyglucose-PET imaging in the detection of infection and inflammation and other benign disorders. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43(1):121-134.
267. Love C, Tomas MB, Tronco GG, Palestro CJ. FDG PET of infection and inflammation. RadioGraphics 2005;25(5):1357-1368.
268. Zhuang H, Alavi A. 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic imaging in the detection and monitoring of infection and inflammation. Semin Nucl Med 2002;32:47-39.
269. Bleeker-Rovers CP, de Kleijn EM, Corstens FH, van der Meer JW, Oyen WJ. Clinical value of FDG PET in patients with fever of unknown origin and patients suspected of focal infection or inflammation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:29-37.
270. Buysschaert I, Vanderschueren S, Blockmans D, Mortelmans L, Knockaert D. Contribution of (18)fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography to the work-up of patients with fever of unknown origin. Eur J Intern Med 2004;15(3):151-150.
271. van Waarde A, Cobben DC, Suurmeijer AJ, et al. Selectivity of 18F-FLT and 18F-FDG for differentiating tumor from inflammation in a rodent model. J Nucl Med 2004;45:695-700.
272. Lewis PJ, Salama A. Uptake of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in sarcoidosis. J Nucl Med 1994;35:1647-1649.
273. Brudin LH, Valind SO, Rhodes CG, et al. Fluorine-18 deoxyglucose uptake in sarcoidosis measured with positron emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med 1994;21:297-305.
274. Botnar RM, Perez AS, Witte S, et al. In vivo molecular imaging of acute and subacute thrombosis using a fibrin-binding magnetic resonance imaging contrast agent. Circulation 2004;109:2023-2029.
275. Flacke S, Fischer S, Scott MJ, et al. Novel MRI contrast agent for molecular imaging of fibrin: implications for detecting vulnerable plaques. Circulation 2001;104:1280-1285.
276. Winter PM, Caruthers SD, Yu X, et al. Improved molecular imaging contrast agent for detection of human thrombus. Magn Reson Med 2003;50:411-416.
277. Yu X, Song SK, Chen J, et al. High-resolution MRI characterization of human thrombus using a novel fibrin-targeted paramagnetic nanoparticle contrast agent. Magn Reson Med 2000;44:867-872.
278. Woods M, Zhang S, Ebron VH, Sherry AD. pH-sensitive modulation of the second hydration sphere in Ianthanide(III) tetra-amide-DOTA complexes: a novel approach to smart MR contrast media. Chemistry 2003;9:4634-4640.
279. Zhou J, Wilson DA, Sun PZ, Klaus JA, Van Zijl PC. Quantitative description of proton exchange processes between water and endogenous and exogenous agents for WEX, CEST, and APT experiments. Magn Reson Med 2004;51:945-952.
280. Aime S, Delli Castelli D, Terreno E. Supramolecular adducts between poly-L-arginine and [TmIIIdotp]: a route to sensitivity-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging-chemical exchange saturation transfer agents. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2003;42:4527-4529.
281. Bottomley PA, Ouwerkerk R, Lee RF, Weiss RG. Four-angle saturation transfer (FAST) method for measuring creatine kinase reaction rates in vivo. Magn Reson Med 2002;47:850-863.
282. Ward KM, Balaban RS. Determination of pH using water protons and chemical exchange dependent saturation transfer (CEST). Magn Reson Med 2000;44:799-802.
283. Chan KW, Barra S, Botta M, Wong WT. Novel gadolinium(III) polyaminocarboxylate macrocyclic complexes as potential magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. J Inorg Biochem 2004;98:677-682.
284. Lindner JR. Molecular imaging with contrast ultrasound and targeted microbubbles. J Nucl Cardiol 2004;11:215-221.
285. Dayton PA, Ferrara KW. Targeted imaging using ultrasound. J Magn Reson Imaging 2002;16:362-377.
286. Blasberg RG, Tjuvajev JG. Herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase as a marker/reporter gene for PET imaging of gene therapy. Q J Nucl Med 1999;43:163-169.
287. Pantuck AJ, Berger F, Zisman A, et al. CL1-SR39: a noninvasive molecular imaging model of prostate cancer suicide gene therapy using positron emission tomography. J Urol 2002;168:1193-1198.
288. Weber WA. Use of PET for monitoring cancer therapy and for predicting outcome. J Nucl Med 2005;46:983-995.
289. Avril NE, Weber WA. Monitoring response to treatment in patients unilizing PET. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43:189-204.
290. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, de Castro Faria S, et al. CT evaluation of the response of gastrointestinal stromal tumors after imatinib mesylate treatment: a quantitative analysis correlated with FDG PET findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;183:1619-1628.
291. Antoch G, Kanja J, Bauer S, et al. Comparison of PET, CT, and dual-modality PET/CT imaging for monitoring of imatinib (STI571) therapy in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Nucl Med 2004;45:357-365.
292. Gayed I, Vu T, Iyer R, et al. The role of 18F-FDG PET in staging and early prediction of response to therapy of recurrent gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Nucl Med 2004;45(1):17-21. [Published correction appears in J Nucl Med 2004;45(11):1803.]
293. Massoud TF, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging in living subjects: seeing fundamental biological processes in a new light. Genes Dev 2003;17:545-580.
294. Jaffer FA, Weissleder R. Molecular imaging in the clinical arena. JAMA 2005;293:855-862.
295. Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging of cancer with positron emission tomography. Nat Rev Cancer 2002;2(9):683-693.
296. Kelloff GJ, Krohn KA, Larson SM, et al. The progress and promise of molecular imaging probes in oncologic drug development. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11(22):7967-7985.