Measuring response with FDG-PET: Methodological aspects

Oncologist

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 369-377

  Allen Auerbach, Martin ^a   Weber, Wolfgang A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Chemotherapy; Fluorodeoxyglucose; Positron emission tomography; Radiotherapy; Response

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ARTICLE; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; DRUG MONITORING; DRUG UPTAKE; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; METABOLISM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ALGORITHMS; ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; CHEMOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; ESOPHAGEAL NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; LYMPHOMA, NON-HODGKIN; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RADIOTHERAPY, ADJUVANT; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 66249085519     PISSN: 10837159     EISSN: 1549490X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2008-0119     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Moertel CG, Hanley JA. The effect of measuring error on the results of therapeutic trials in advanced cancer. Cancer 1976;38:388-394.
2. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: Revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247.
3. Buyse M, Thirion P, Carlson RW et al. Relation between tumour response to first-line chemotherapy and survival in advanced colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis. Meta-Analysis Group in Cancer. Lancet 2000;356:373-378.
4. Ratain MJ. Phase II oncology trials: Let's be positive. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:5661-5662. (Pubitemid 41170285)
5. Goffin J, Baral S, Tu D et al. Objective responses in patients with malignant melanoma or renal cell cancer in early clinical studies do not predict regulatory approval. Clin Cancer Res 2005;11:5928-5934. (Pubitemid 41170322)
6. Bruzzi P, Del Mastro L, Sormani MP et al. Objective response to chemotherapy as a potential surrogate end point of survival in metastatic breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:5117-5125. (Pubitemid 46224020)
7. Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med 2006;354:496-507. (Pubitemid 43200300)
8. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: Consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:571-578. (Pubitemid 350002965)
9. MacManus 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. (Pubitemid 46606405)
10. Hellwig D, Graeter TP, Ukena D et al. Value of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography after induction therapy of locally advanced bronchogenic carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004;128:892-899. (Pubitemid 39575295)
11. Akhurst T, Downey RJ, Ginsberg MS et al. An initial experience with FDG-PET in the imaging of residual disease after induction therapy for lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2002;73:259-64; discussion 264-266. (Pubitemid 34084576)
12. Ryu JS, Choi NC, Fischman AJ et al. FDG-PET in staging and restaging non-small cell lung cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: Correlation with histopathology. Lung Cancer 2002;35:179-187. (Pubitemid 34136096)
13. Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Winokur TS et al. Repeat FDG-PET after neoadjuvant therapy is a predictor of pathologic response in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78:1903-1909; discussion 1909.
14. Port JL, Kent MS, Korst RJ et al. Positron emission tomography scanning poorly predicts response to preoperative chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;77:254-259; discussion 259.
15. Eschmann SM, Friedel G, Paulsen F et al. 18F-FDG PET for assessment of therapy response and preoperative re-evaluation after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy in stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:463-471. (Pubitemid 46426996)
16. Brücher BL, Weber W, Bauer M et al. Neoadjuvant therapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Ann Surg 2001;233:300-309. (Pubitemid 32187807)
17. Flamen P, Van Cutsem E, Lerut A et al. Positron emission tomography for assessment of the response to induction radiochemotherapy in locally advanced oesophageal cancer. Ann Oncol 2002;13:361-368. (Pubitemid 34704995)
18. Swisher SG, Maish M, Erasmus JJ et al. Utility of PET, CT, and EUS to identify pathologic responders in esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78:1152-1160; discussion 1152-1160.
19. Swisher SG, Erasmus J, Maish 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. (Pubitemid 39314740)
20. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F et al. Posttherapy [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in carcinoma of the cervix: Response and outcome. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2167-2171. (Pubitemid 41095151)
21. 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;103:339-348. (Pubitemid 40129294)
22. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Werner M et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy response of osteogenic sarcoma using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1637-1643. (Pubitemid 29471153)
23. 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;23:8828-8834. (Pubitemid 46211529)
24. Ott K, Fink U, Becker K et al. Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in gastric carcinoma by metabolic imaging: Results of a prospective trial. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:4604-4610. (Pubitemid 46594034)
25. Weber WA, Ott K, Becker K et al. Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction by metabolic imaging. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3058-3065. (Pubitemid 32565444)
26. Wieder HA, Brücher 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. (Pubitemid 41103602)
27. Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA. Measuring response to chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer: Methodological considerations. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31(suppl 1):S103-S11.
28. Thie J. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1431-1434. (Pubitemid 47618494)
29. Huang SC. Anatomy of SUV. Standardized uptake value. Nucl Med Biol 2000;27:643-646.
30. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: Variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology 1993;189:847-850. (Pubitemid 23354506)
31. Kim CK, Gupta NC. Dependency of standardized uptake values of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose on body size: Comparison of body surface area correction and lean body mass correction. Nucl Med Commun 1996;17:890-894. (Pubitemid 26384235)
32. Keyes JW Jr. SUV: Standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995;36:1836-1839.
33. 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. (Pubitemid 46606307)
34. 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;23:8362-8370. (Pubitemid 46264010)
35. Hamberg LM, Hunter GJ, Alpert NM et al. The dose uptake ratio as an index of glucose metabolism: Useful parameter or oversimplification? J Nucl Med 1994;35:1308-1312.
36. Stahl A, Ott K, Schwaiger M et al. Comparison of different SUV-based methods for monitoring cytotoxic therapy with FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:1471-1478. (Pubitemid 39592766)
37. Torizuka T, Clavo AC, Wahl RL. Effect of hyperglycemia on in vitro tumor uptake of tritiated FDG, thymidine, L-methionine and L-leucine. J Nucl Med 1997;38:382-386. (Pubitemid 27376889)
38. Diederichs C, Staib L, Glatting G. FDG PET: Elevated plasma glucose reduces both uptake and detection rate of pancreatic malignancies. J Nucl Med 1998;39:1030-1033. (Pubitemid 28270121)
39. Paquet N, Albert A, Foidart J et al. Within-patient variability of (18)F-FDG: Standardized uptake values in normal tissues. J Nucl Med 2004;45:784-788.
40. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Egelhof T et al. Focal tracer uptake: A potential artifact in contrast-enhanced dual-modality PET/CT scans. J Nucl Med 2002;43:1339-1342.
41. Nakamoto Y, Chin BB, Kraitchman DL et al. Effects of nonionic intravenous contrast agents at PET/CT imaging: Phantom and canine studies. Radiology 2003;227:817-824. (Pubitemid 36583042)
42. Mawlawi O, Erasmus JJ, Munden RF et al. Quantifying the effect of IV contrast media on integrated PET/CT: Clinical evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:308-319. (Pubitemid 46100297)
43. Yau YY, Chan WS, Tam YM et al. Application of intravenous contrast in PET/CT: Does it really introduce significant attenuation correction error? J Nucl Med 2005;46:283-291.
44. Dizendorf E, Hany TF, Buck A et al. Cause and magnitude of the error induced by oral CT contrast agent in CT-based attenuation correction of PET emission studies. J Nucl Med 2003;44:732-738. (Pubitemid 39655207)
45. Pan T, Mawlawi O, Nehmeh SA et al. Attenuation correction of PET images with respiration-averaged CT images in PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1481-1487. (Pubitemid 46173260)
46. Goerres GW, Kamel E, Heidelberg TN et al. PET-CT image co-registration in the thorax: Influence of respiration. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:351-360. (Pubitemid 34253247)
47. Goerres GW, Burger C, Schwitter MR et al. PET/CT of the abdomen: Optimizing the patient breathing pattern. Eur Radiol 2003;13:734-739. (Pubitemid 36790555)
48. Wahl RL, Zasadny KR, Helvie M et al. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: Initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol 1993;11:2101-2111. (Pubitemid 23332245)
49. Jansson T, Westlin JE, Ahlström H et al. Positron emission tomography studies in patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer: A method for early therapy evaluation? J Clin Oncol 1995;13:1470-1477.
50. Findlay M, Young H, Cunningham D et al. Noninvasive monitoring of tumor metabolism using fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer liver metastases: Correlation with tumor response to fluorouracil. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:700-708. (Pubitemid 26085512)
51. Schiller JH, Harrington D, Belani CP et al. Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;346:92-98. (Pubitemid 34438899)
52. Kelsen DP, Minsky B, Smith M et al. Preoperative therapy for esophageal cancer: A randomized comparison of chemotherapy versus radiation therapy. J Clin Oncol 1990;8:1352-1361. (Pubitemid 20252307)
53. Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working Group. Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2002;359:1727-1733. (Pubitemid 34607086)
54. Kelsen D. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:283-285. (Pubitemid 32112837)
55. Urba SG, Orringer MB, Turrisi A et al. Randomized trial of preoperative chemoradiation versus surgery alone in patients with locoregional esophageal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:305-313. (Pubitemid 32112841)
56. Ajani JA, Mansfield PF, Lynch PM et al. Enhanced staging and all chemotherapy preoperatively in patients with potentially resectable gastric carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:2403-2411. (Pubitemid 29368239)
57. Ott K, Weber WA, Lordick F et al. Metabolic imaging predicts response, survival, and recurrence in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:4692-4698. (Pubitemid 46646244)
58. Chollet P, Amat S, Cure H et al. Prognostic significance of a complete pathological response after induction chemotherapy in operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2002;86:1041-1046. (Pubitemid 34441058)
59. 18F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1676-1688.
60. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1689-1695.
61. Rousseau C, Devillers A, Sagan C et al. Monitoring of early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage II and III breast cancer by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:5366-5372. (Pubitemid 46623167)
62. 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;23:7445-7453. (Pubitemid 46291806)
63. Minn H, Zasadny KR, Quint LE et al. Lung cancer: Reproducibility of quantitative measurements for evaluating 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose uptake at PET. Radiology 1995;196:167-173.
64. Weber WA, Ziegler SI, Thödtmann R et al. Reproducibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1771-1777. (Pubitemid 29523568)
65. Nakamoto Y, Zasadny KR, Minn H et al. Reproducibility of common semiquantitative parameters for evaluating lung cancer glucose metabolism with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose. Mol Imaging Biol 2002;4:171-178. (Pubitemid 34272701)
66. Berthelsen AK, Holm S, Loft A et al. PET/CT with intravenous contrast can be used for PET attenuation correction in cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;32:1167-1175. (Pubitemid 41355943)
67. Weber WA, Ott K. Imaging of esophageal and gastric cancer. Semin Oncol 2004;31:530-541. (Pubitemid 39070271)
68. Brun E, Kjellén E, Tennvall J et al. FDG PET studies during treatment: Prediction of therapy outcome in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck 2002;24:127-135. (Pubitemid 34111509)
69. Lordick F, Ott K, Krause BJ et al. PET to assess early metabolic response and to guide treatment of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction: The MUNICON phase II trial. Lancet Oncol 2007;8:797-805. (Pubitemid 47308659)
70. Ott K, Herrmann K, Lordick F et al. Early metabolic response evaluation by fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography allows in vivo testing of chemosensitivity in gastric cancer: Long-term results of a prospective study. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:2012-2018.
71. Ceresoli GL, Chiti A, Zucali PA et al. Early response evaluation in malignant pleural mesothelioma by positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:4587-4593. (Pubitemid 46630956)
72. Townsend D, Carney J, Yap J et al. PET/CT today and tomorrow. J Nucl Med 2004;45(suppl 1):4S-14S.
73. Czernin J, Allen-Auerbach M, Schelbert HR. Improvements in cancer staging with PET/CT: Literature-based evidence as of September 2006. J Nucl Med 2007;48(suppl 1):78S-88S.
74. Goerres G, Schmid D, von Schulthess G et al. FDG PET/CT improves the confidence of anatomic assignment of cancer lesions in the head and neck: A comparison with FDG PET and contrast enhanced CT. J Nucl Med 2003;44:128.
75. Goerres GW, Burger C, Kamel E et al. Respiration-induced attenuation artifact at PET/CT: Technical considerations. Radiology 2003;226:906-910. (Pubitemid 36259170)
76. Pöttgen C, Levegrun S, Theegarten D et al. Value of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer for prediction of pathologic response and times to relapse after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:97-106. (Pubitemid 43166182)
77. Beer AJ, Wieder HA, Lordick F et al. Adenocarcinomas of esophagogastric junction: Multi-detector row CT to evaluate early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Radiology 2006;239:472-480.
78. Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging. The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2:159-171.
79. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response 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.
80. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:579-586. (Pubitemid 350002966)
81. Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute trials. J Nucl Med 2006;47:1059-1066. (Pubitemid 46939960)