On the added value of baseline FDG-PET in malignant lymphoma

Molecular Imaging and Biology

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 225-232

  Van Ufford, Henriette Quarles ^a,b   Hoekstra, Otto ^c   De Haas, Marie ^b   Fijnheer, Rob ^b   Wittebol, Shulamiet ^b   Tieks, Bianca ^b   Kramer, Mark ^c   De Klerk, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b MEANDER MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Baseline PET; FDG PET; Hodgkin's disease; Malignant lymphoma; Non Hodgkin's lymphoma; Therapy evaluation

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; LARGE CELL LYMPHOMA; LYMPHOCYTOMA; LYMPHOMA; MALE; MANTLE CELL LYMPHOMA; MARGINAL ZONE LYMPHOMA; MUCOSA ASSOCIATED LYMPHOID TISSUE LYMPHOMA; NONHODGKIN LYMPHOMA; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMANS; LYMPHOMA, NON-HODGKIN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; WHOLE BODY IMAGING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77953538947     PISSN: 15361632     EISSN: 18602002     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11307-009-0259-3     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Hoskin PJ (2003) PET in lymphoma: what are the oncologist's needs? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30(Suppl 1):S37-S41
2. Carbone PP, Kaplan HS, Musshoff K et al (1971) Report of the committee on Hodgkin's disease staging classification. Cancer Res 31:1860-1861
3. Armitage JO (2005) Staging non-Hodgkin lymphoma. CA Cancer J Clin 55:368-376
4. Hoh CK, Glaspy J, Rosen P et al (1997) Whole-body FDG-PET imaging for staging of Hodgkin's disease and lymphoma. J Nucl Med 38:343-348
5. Buchmann I, Reinhardt M, Elsner K et al (2001) 2-(fluorine-18)fluoro-2- deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma. A bicenter trial. Cancer 91:889-899
6. Seam P, Juweid ME, Cheson BD (2007) The role of FDG-PET scans in patients with lymphoma. Blood 110:3507-3516
7. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al (2007) Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the imaging subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:571-578
8. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al (2007) Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:579-586
9. Manning K, Tepfer B, Goldklang G et al (2007) Clinical practice guidelines for the utilization of positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in selected oncologic applications: suggestions from a provider group. Mol Imaging Biol 9:324-332
10. Lister TA, Crowther D, Sutcliffe SB et al (1989) Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin's disease: cotswolds meeting. J Clin Oncol 7:1630-1636
11. Altman DG (1999) Inter-rater agreement. In: Altman DG (ed) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall, London, pp 403-409
12. Wu TH, Huang YH, Lee JJ et al (2004) Radiation exposure during transmission measurements: comparison between CT- and germanium-based techniques with a current PET scanner. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31:38-43
13. Brix G, Lechel U, Glatting G et al (2005) Radiation exposure of patients undergoing whole-body dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. J Nucl Med 46:608-613
14. Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, Beyer T et al (1998) Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. Med Phys 25:2046-2053
15. Griscom NT (2002) A suggestion: look at the images first, before you read the history. Radiology 223:9-10