PET-CT imaging in pediatric oncology

Cancer Imaging

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 35-43

  McCarville, M Beth ^a  

^a ST JUDE CHILDREN S RESEARCH HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer; Childhood; Computed tomography; Malignancy; Positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIAZEPAM; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GLUCOSE DERIVATIVE; MEDRONATE TECHNETIUM TC 99M; RADIOISOTOPE; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

BONE MARROW METASTASIS; BONE METASTASIS; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CHILD; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE SEVERITY; DRUG EFFICACY; GLUCOSE TRANSPORT; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; LUNG DISEASE; LUNG METASTASIS; LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ONCOLOGY; OSTEOSARCOMA; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PARAGANGLIOMA; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PEDIATRIC WARD; PEDIATRICS; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREGNANCY; PROGNOSIS; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFT TISSUE SARCOMA; SOLID TUMOR; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUMOR BIOPSY; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; TUMOR VOLUME; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION; ADOLESCENT; AGE; DRUG MONITORING; METASTASIS; METHODOLOGY; NEOPLASM; SCINTISCANNING;

ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; CHILD; DRUG MONITORING; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 70349264528     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14707330     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1102/1470-7330.2009.0008     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Jadvar H, Connolly LP, Fahey FH, Shulkin BL. PET and PET/ CT in pediatric oncology. Semin Nucl Med 2007; 37: 316-31. doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2007.04. 001. PMid:17707239.
2. Gurney JG, Young Jr JL, Roffers SD, Smith MA, Bunin GR. Soft tissue sarcomas. In: Ries LAG, Smith MA, Gurney JG, et al., editors. Cancer incidence and survival among children and adolescents: United States SEER Program 1975-1995. National Cancer Institute; 1999, p. 111-1223.
3. Link MP, Gebhardt M, Meyers P. Osteosarcoma. In: Pizzo P, Poplack DG, editors. Principles and practice of pediatric oncology. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006, p. 1074-115.
4. Bernstein M, Kovar H, Paulussen M, et al. Ewing sarcoma family of tumors: Ewing sarcoma of bone and soft tissue and the peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumors. In: Pizzo P, Poplack DG, editors. Principles and practice of pediatric oncology. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2008, p. 1002-32.
5. Wexler L, Meyer W, Helman L. Rhabdomyosarcoma and the undifferentiated sarcomas. In: Pizzo P, Poplack D, editors. Principles and practice of pediatric oncology. 5th ed. Williams & Wilkins: Lippincott; 2006, p. 971-1001.
6. Kaste SC, McCarville MB. How to image a child by PET-computed tomography. In: Charron M, editor. Practical pediatric PET imaging. 1st ed. Toronto: Springer; 2006, p. 121-34. doi:10.1007/0-387-34641-4-9.
7. Himms-Hagen J. Brown adipose tissue thermogenesis: interdisciplinary studies. FASEB J 1990; 4: 2890-8.
8. Hany TF, Gharehpapagh E, Kamel EM, Buck A, Himms-Hagen J, Von Schulthess GK. Brown adipose tissue: a factor to consider in symmetrical tracer uptake in the neck and upper chest region. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29: 1393-8. doi:10.1007/s00259-002-0902-6. PMid:12271425.
9. 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 170-6.
10. Therasse P, Arbuck S, Eisenhauer E, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 205-16. doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.205. PMid:10655437.
11. Fournier LS, Cuenod CA, Clement O, Siauve N, Frija G. Imaging of response to treatment in oncology. J Radiol 2007; 88: 829-43. doi:10.1016/S0221-0363(07) 89885-4. PMid:17652977.
12. Rohren EM, Turkington TG, Coleman RE. Clinical applications of PET in oncology. Radiology 2004; 231: 305-32. doi:10.1148/radiol.2312021185. PMid:15044750.
13. Kostakoglu L, Agress Jr H, Goldsmith SJ. Clinical role of FDG PET in evaluation of cancer patients. Radiographics 2003; 23: 315-40. doi:10.1148/rg.232025705. PMid:12640150.
14. Schuetze SM, Baker LH, Benjamin RS, Canetta R. Selection of response criteria for clinical trials of sarcoma treatment. Oncologist 2008; 13(Suppl 2), 32-40. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.13-S2-32. PMid:18434637.
15. 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. doi:10.1097/00003072-200011000-00004. PMid:11079583.
16. Hawkins DS, Rajendran JG, Conrad III 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. doi:10.1002/cncr.10599. PMid:12115361.
17. 18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts outcome for Ewing sarcoma family of tumors. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 8828-34. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.01.7079. PMid:16314643.
18. McCarville MB, Lederman HM, Santana VM, et al. Distinguishing benign from malignant pulmonary nodules with helical chest CT in children with malignant solid tumors. Radiology 2006; 239: 514-20. doi:10.1148/radiol. 2392050631. PMid:16641356.
19. Franzius C. FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with spiral CT. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 479-86. doi:10.1023/A:1011111322376. PMid:11398879.
20. Volker T, Denecke T, Steffen I, et al. Positron emission tomography for staging of pediatric sarcoma patients: results of a prospective multicenter trial. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 5435-41. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.12.2473. PMid:18048826.
21. Gerth HU, Juergens KU, Dirksen U, Gerss J, Schober O, Franzius C. Significant benefit of multimodal imaging: PET/CT compared with PET alone in staging and follow-up of patients with Ewing tumors. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 1932-9. doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.045286. PMid:18006618.
22. Iagaru A, Quon A, McDougall IR, Gambhir SS. F-18 FDG PET/CT evaluation of osseous and soft tissue sarcomas. Clin Nucl Med 2006; 31: 754-60. doi:10.1097/01.rlu.0000246846.01492.31. PMid:17117068.
23. Franzius C, Bielack S, Flege S, Sciuk J, Jurgens H, Schober O. Prognostic significance of (18)F-FDG and (99m)Tc-methylene diphosphonate uptake in primary osteosarcoma. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1012-7.
24. Franzius C, Sciuk J, Daldrup-Link HE, et al. FDG-PET for detection of osseous metastases from malignant primary bone tumours: comparison with bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med 2000; 27: 1305-11. doi:10.1007/S002590000301.
25. McCarville MB, Christie R, Daw NC, Spunt SL, Kaste SC. PET/CT in the evaluation of childhood sarcomas. Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184: 1293-304.
26. 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.
27. 18F-FDG uptake can mimic metastatic disease. Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187: 1124-8 (Erratum in Am J Roentgenol 2006; 187: 1146). doi:10.2214/AJR.06.0171. PMid:16985165.
28. Klem ML, Grewal RK, Wexler LH, Schoder H, Meyers PA, Wolden SL. PET for staging in rhabdomyosarcoma: an evaluation of PET as an adjunct to current staging tools. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2007; 29: 9-14. doi:10.1097/MPH. 0b013e3180307693. PMid: .
29. Ben Arush MW, Bar SR, Postovsky S, et al. Assessing the use of FDG-PET in the detection of regional and metastatic nodes in alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma of extremities. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2006; 28: 440-5. doi:10.1097/01.mph.0000212949.12856.02. PMid: .
30. Malawer MM, Link MP, Donaldson SS. Cancer. Principles and practice of oncology. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001, p. 1891-935.