Imaging bone and soft tissue tumors with the proliferation marker [ 18F] fluorodeoxythymidine

Clinical Cancer Research

Volumn 14, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 2970-2977

  Buck, Andreas K ^a,c   Herrmann, Ken ^a   Büschenfelde, Christian Meyer Zum ^b   Juweid, Malik E ^d   Bischoff, Mark ^e   Glatting, Gerhard ^b   Weirich, Gregor ^c   Möller, Peter ^f   Wester, Hans Jürgen ^a   Scheidhauer, Klemens ^a   Dechow, Tobias ^b   Peschel, Christian ^b   Schwaiger, Markus ^a   Reske, Sven N ^b  

^a Department of Medicine   (Germany)

^b Department of Internal Medicine III ^*  (Germany)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^e Departments of Traumatology Hand Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery   (Germany)

^f UNIVERSITY OF ULM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; FLUORODEOXYTHYMIDINE F 18; TRACER; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; FLUORINE; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT; THYMIDINE;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BONE TUMOR; CANCER GRADING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MALE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOISOTOPE DISTRIBUTION; SARCOMA; SOFT TISSUE TUMOR; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; TUMOR SCINTISCANNING; ADOLESCENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATHOLOGY; SCINTISCANNING;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BONE NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FLUORINE RADIOISOTOPES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SOFT TISSUE NEOPLASMS; THYMIDINE;

EID: 49649119691     PISSN: 10780432     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4294     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Landis SH, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics, 1999. CA Cancer J Clin 1999;49:8-31.
2. Coindre JM, Terrier P, Guillou L, et al. Predictive value of grade for metastasis development in the main histologic types of adult soft tissue sarcomas: a study of 1240 patients from the French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group. Cancer 2001;91:1914-26.
3. Panicek DM, Gatsonis C, Rosenthal Dl, et al. CT and MR imaging in the local staging of primary malignant musculoskeletal neoplasms: Report of the Radiology Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 1997;202:237-46.
4. Madewell JE, Ragsdale BD, Sweet DE. Radiologic and pathologic analysis of solitary bone lesions. Part I: internal margins. Radiol Clin North Am 1981;19:715-48.
5. Pettersson H, Springfield D, Enneking WF. Radiologic management of musculoskeletal tumors. Philadelphia: Springer Publishers; 1999.
6. Kern KA, Brunetti A, Norton JA, et al. Metabolic imaging of human extremity musculoskeletal tumors by PET. J Nucl Med 1988;29:181-6.
7. Adler LP, Blair HF, Markley JT, et al. Noninvasive grading of musculoskeletal tumors using PET. J Nucl Med 1991;32:1508-12.
8. Kole AC, Plaat BE, Hoekstra HJ, Vaalburg W, Molenaar WM. FDG and L- [1 - 11C]-tyrosine imaging of soft-tissue tumors before and after therapy. J Nucl Med 1999;40:381-6.
9. Eary JF, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, et al. Quantitative [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in pretreatment and grading of sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 1998;4:1215-20.
10. Aoki J, Watanabe H, Shinozaki T, et al. FDG PET of primary benign and malignant bone tumors: standardized uptake value in 52 lesions. Radiology 2001;219:774-7.
11. Lucas JD, O'Doherty MJ, Cronin BF, et al. Prospective evaluation of soft tissue masses and sarcomas using fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Br J Surg 1999;86:550-6.
12. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Heymer B, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography of soft tissue tumours: is a non-invasive determination of biological activity possible? Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26:599-605.
13. Schulte M, Brecht-Kraus D, Heymer B, et al. Grading of tumors and tumorlike lesions of bone: evaluation by FDG-PET. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1695-701.
14. Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Sciuk J, et al. FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with spiral CT. Ann Oncol 2001;12:479-86.
15. Tateishi U, Yamaguchi U, Seki K, et al. Glut-1 expression and enhanced glucose metabolism are associated with tumour grade in bone and soft tissue sarcomas: a prospective evaluation by [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:683-91.
16. Brenner W, Conrad EU, Eary JF. FDG PET imaging for grading and prediction of outcome in chondrosarcoma patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:189-95.
17. Hawkins DS, Schuetze SM, Butrynski JE, et al. [18F] Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts outcome for Ewing sarcoma family of tumors. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:8828-34.
18. Schwarzbach MH, Hinz U, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, et al. Prognostic significance of preoperative [18-F] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in patients with resectable soft tissue sarcomas. Ann Surg 2005;241:286-94.
19. loannidis JP, Lau J. 18F-FDG PET for the diagnosis and grading of soft-tissue sarcoma: a meta-analysis. J Nucl Med 2003;44:717-24.
20. Eary JF, O'Sullivan F, Powitan Y, et al. Sarcoma tumor FDG uptake measured by PET and patient outcome: a retrospective analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1149-54.
21. Bastiaannet E. Groen H, Jager PL, et al. The value of FDG-PET in the detection, grading and response to therapy of soft tissue and bone sarcomas; a systematic review and meta-analysis Cancer Treat Rev 2004;30:83-101.
22. Kubota R, Kubota K, Yamada S, et al. Microautoradiographic study for the differentiation of intratumoral macrophages, granulation tissues and cancer cells by the dynamics of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake. J Nucl Med 1994;35:104-12.
23. Shreve PD, Anzai Y, Wahl RL. Pitfalls in oncologic diagnosis with FDG PET imaging: physiologic and benign variants Radiographics 1999;19:61-77.
24. Schuetze SM, Rubin BP, Vernon C, et al. Use of positron emission tomography in localized extremity soft tissue sarcoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy Cancer 2005;103:339-48.
25. van Ginkel RJ, Hoekstra HJ, Pruim J, et al. FDG-PET to evaluate response to hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion for locally advanced soft-tissue sarcoma J Nucl Med 1996;37:984-90.
26. Stroobants S, Goeminne J, Seegers M, et al. 18FDG positron emission tomography for the early prediction of response in advanced soft tissue sarcoma treated with imatinib mesylate (Glivec). Eur J Cancer 2003;39:2012-20.
27. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Werner M, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy response of osteogenic sarcoma using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1637-43.
28. Franzius C, Sciuk J, Brinkschmidt C, Jurgens H, Schober O. Evaluation of chemotherapy response in primary bone tumors with F-18 FDG positron emission tomography compared with histologically assessed tumor necrosis. Clin Nucl Med 2000;25:874-81.
29. Jones DN, McCowage GB, Sostman HD, et al. Monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy response of soft-tissue and musculoskeletal sarcoma using fluorine-18-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1996;37:1438-44.
30. Hawkins DS, Rajendran JG, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, Eary JF. Evaluation of chemotherapy response in pediatric bone sarcomas by [F-18]-fluorodeoxy -D-glucose positron emission tomography. Cancer 2002;94:3277-84.
31. 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;28:1707-23.
32. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, Silverman DH, Coleman RE, Phelps ME. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1-93S.
33. Gupta N, Gill H, Graeber G, et al. Dynamic positron emission tomography with F18 fluorodeoxyglucose imaging in differentiation of benign from malignant lung/mediastinal lesions. Chest 1998;114:1105-11.
34. 18F] FLT and positron emission tomography. Nat Med 1998;4:1334-6.
35. Buck AK, Bommer M, Stilgenbauer S, et al. Molecular imaging of proliferation in malignant lymphoma. Cancer Res 2006;66:11055-61.
36. Cobben DC, Elsinga PH, Suurmeijer AJ, et al. Detection and grading of soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities with 18F-3′-fluoro-3′-deoxy- L-thymidine. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:1685-90.
37. Fletcher CDM, Unni K, Mertens F. WHO classification of tumors. Pathology and genetics of tumour of soft tissue and bone. Lyon: IARC press; 2002.
38. Guillou L, Coindre JM, Bonichon F, et al. Comparative study of the National Cancer Institute and French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma Group grading systems in a population of 410 adult patients with soft tissue sarcoma. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:350-62.
39. 18F] FLT). J Radioanal Nucl Chem 2000;24:843-6.
40. Herrmann K, Wieder HA, Buck AK, et al. Early response assessment using 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F] fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography in high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:3552-8.
41. von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC, Hany TF. Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions. Radiology 2006;238:405-22.
42. 18F] FDG for differentiating tumor from inflammation in a rodent model. J Nucl Med 2004;45:695-700.
43. 18F] FDG. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1426-31.
44. Folpe AL, Lyles RH, Sprouse JT, Conrad EU III, Eary JF. (F-18) fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a predictor of pathologic grade and other prognostic variables in bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:1279-87.
45. 18F] fluorothymidine into L5178Y tumours in vivo is dependent on thymidine kinase 1 protein levels. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32:257-63.
46. 18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine metabolism and retention. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;259:1269-75.
47. Perumal M, Pillai RG, Barthel H, et al. Redistribution of nucleoside transporters to the cell membrane provides a novel approach for imaging thymidylate synthase inhibition by positron emission tomography. Cancer Res 2006;66:8558-64.
48. 18F] fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography imaging: evaluation of analytical methods. Cancer Res 2005;65:10104-12.
49. Muzi M, Mankoff DA, Grierson JR, Wells JM, Vesselle H, Krohn KA. Kinetic modeling of 3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine in somatic tumors: mathematical studies. J Nucl Med 2005;46:371-80.
50. 18F] FLT uptake after chemotherapy: an experimental study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1462-9.
51. 18F] fluorothymidine as a new marker for monitoring tumor response to antiproliferative therapy in vivo with positron emission tomography. Cancer Res 2003;63:3791-8.
52. 18F] fluorothymidine positron emission tomography: the effect of cisplatin on a fibrosarcoma tumor model in vivo. Cancer Res 2005;65:4202-10.