PET/CT in primary musculoskeletal tumours: A step forward

European Radiology

Volumn 20, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 2959-2972

  Lakkaraju, A ^a   Patel, C N ^b   Bradley, K M ^b   Scarsbrook, A F ^a  

^a LEEDS TEACHING HOSPITALS NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b OXFORD UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Chondrosarcoma; Ewing's sarcoma; Lymphoma; Molecular imaging; Musculoskeletal; Myeloma; Oncology; Osteosarcoma; PET CT; Sarcoma

Indexed keywords

1 FLUORO 3 (2 NITRO 1 IMIDAZOLYL) 2 PROPANOL F 18; 3' FLUOROTHYMIDINE F 18; ALPHA METHYL TYROSINE F 18; CARBON 11; CHOLINE C 11; FLUORINE 18; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; METHIONINE C 11; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT; TECHNETIUM 99M; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANEURYSMAL BONE CYST; ANGIOMYOLIPOMA; ARTICLE; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BONE TUMOR; CANCER STAGING; CHONDROSARCOMA; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DESMOID TUMOR; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EWING SARCOMA; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; HEMANGIOMA; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; LARGE CELL LYMPHOMA; LEIOMYOSARCOMA; LIPOMA; LIPOSARCOMA; LUNG METASTASIS; MALIGNANT FIBROUS HISTIOCYTOMA; MULTIPLE MYELOMA; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASE; NERVE SHEATH TUMOR; NEUROFIBROMATOSIS; NONHODGKIN LYMPHOMA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; OSTEOCHONDROMA; OSTEOSARCOMA; PLASMACYTOMA; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RHABDOMYOSARCOMA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

BONE NEOPLASMS; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; FORECASTING; HUMANS; MUSCLE NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SUBTRACTION TECHNIQUE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 78650307602     PISSN: 09387994     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-010-1862-z     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. BE Hilner BA Siegel D Liu, et al. 2008 Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry J Clin Oncol 26 2155 2161 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.5631
2. TM Blodgett CC Meltzer DW Townsend 2008 PET/CT: form and function Radiology 242 360 385 10.1148/radiol.2422051113
3. SS Gambhir J Cerznin J Schwimmer, et al. 2001 A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature J Nucl Med 42 Suppl 1S 93S 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3Mvjs1Wgtw%3D%3D 11483694
4. O Israel M Mor D Gaitini, et al. 2002 Combined functional and structural evaluation of cancer patients with a hybrid camera-based PET/CT system using 18 F-FDG J Nucl Med 43 1129 1136 12215549
5. G Antoch FM Vogt LS Freudenberg, et al. 2003 Whole-body dual modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology JAMA 290 3199 3206 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXjvVyr 10.1001/jama.290.24.3199 14693872 (Pubitemid 38020681)
6. G Antoch N Saoudi H Kuehl, et al. 2004 Accuracy of whole-body dual-modality fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for tumor staging in solid tumors: comparison with CT and PET J Clin Oncol 22 4357 4368 10.1200/JCO.2004.08.120 15514377 (Pubitemid 41185156)
7. GK von Schulthess HC Steinert TF Hany 2006 Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions Radiology 238 405 422 10.1148/radiol. 2382041977 (Pubitemid 43134354)
8. JW Kim CV Dang 2006 Cancer's molecular sweet tooth and the Warburg effect Cancer Res 66 8927 8930 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28Xps1aitL4%3D 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN- 06-1501 16982728 (Pubitemid 44521105)
9. F Feldman R van Heertum C Manos 2003 18FDG PET scanning of benign and malignant musculoskeletal lesions Skeletal Radiol 32 201 208 10.1007/s00256-003-0623-3 12652335
10. TF Hany HC Steinert GW Goerres, et al. 2002 PET diagnostic accuracy: improvement with in-line PET-CT system: initial results Radiology 225 575 581 10.1148/radiol.2252011568 12409597
11. TD Poeppel BJ Krause TA Heusner, et al. 2009 PET/CT for the staging and follow-up of patients with malignancies Eur J Radiol 70 382 392 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1Mvhs1KgsQ%3D%3D 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.03.051 19406595
12. H Jadvar S Gamie L Ramanna, et al. 2004 PET in the musculoskeletal system Semin Nucl Med 34 254 261 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2004.06.002 15493003 (Pubitemid 39361037)
13. J Aoki K Endo H Watanabe, et al. 2003 FDG-PET for evaluating musculoskeletal tumors: a review J Orthop Sci 8 435 441 10.1007/s10776-001-0539- 6 12768492 (Pubitemid 36702099)
14. H Watanabe T Shinozaki T Yanagawa, et al. 2000 Glucose metabolic analysis of musculoskeletal tumours using 18fluorine-FDG PET as an aid to pre-operative planning J Bone Joint Surg Br 82 760 767 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3cvjslensw%3D%3D 10.1302/0301-620X.82B5.9824 10963181
15. LP Adler HF Blair JT Makley, et al. 1991 Noninvasive grading of musculoskeletal tumors using PET J Nucl Med 32 1508 1512 1:STN:280: DyaK3Mzjt1KqtA%3D%3D 1869970
16. JP Ioannidis J Lau 2003 18F-FDG PET for the diagnosis and grading of soft tissue sarcoma: a meta-analysis J Nucl Med 44 717 724 12732672
17. N Israel-Mardirosian LP Adler 2003 Positron emission tomography of soft tissue sarcomas Curr Opin Oncol 15 327 330 10.1097/00001622-200307000-00008 12874512 (Pubitemid 36994038)
18. J Aoki H Watanabe T Shinozaki, et al. 2003 FDG-PET for preoperative differential diagnosis between benign and malignant soft tissue masses Skeletal Radiol 32 133 138 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3s%2FptlaktQ%3D%3D 10.1007/s00256-002-0586-9 12605276 (Pubitemid 36818112)
19. JD Lucas MJ O'Doherty BF Cronin, et al. 1999 Prospective evaluation of soft tissue masses and sarcomas using fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography Br J Surg 86 550 556 1:STN:280:DyaK1M3jtlOrsg%3D%3D 10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01090.x 10215835 (Pubitemid 29195057)
20. MH Schwarzbach A Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss F Willeke, et al. 2000 Clinical value of [18-F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in soft tissue sarcomas Ann Surg 231 380 386 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c7nslWisQ%3D%3D 10.1097/00000658-200003000-00011 10714631 (Pubitemid 30137126)
21. MA Lodge JD Lucas PK Marsden, et al. 1999 A PET study of 18FDG uptake in soft tissue masses Eur J Nucl Med 26 22 30 1:CAS:528:DyaK1cXnvFSisrc%3D 10.1007/s002590050355 9933658 (Pubitemid 29137735)
22. YM Chen G Huang XG Sun, et al. 2008 Optimizing delayed scan time for FDG PET: comparison of the early and late delayed scan Nucl Med Commun 29 425 430 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3282f4d389 18391725 (Pubitemid 351507535)
23. K Hamada Y Tomita T Ueda, et al. 2006 Evaluation of delayed 18F-FDG PET in differential diagnosis for malignant soft-tissue tumors Ann Nucl Med 20 671 675 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXjvFKqsbs%3D 10.1007/BF02984678 17385305
24. RE Ferner JF Golding M Smith, et al. 2008 [18F] 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) as a diagnostic tool for neurofibromatosis 1 (NF-1) associated malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours (MPNSTs): a long-term clinical study Ann Oncol 19 390 394 1:STN:280: DC%2BD1c%2Fotlaltg%3D%3D 10.1093/annonc/mdm450 17932395 (Pubitemid 351201726)
25. MA Bredella M Torriani F Hornicek, et al. 2007 Value of PET in the assessment of patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 Am J Roentgenol 189 928 935 10.2214/AJR.07.2060 (Pubitemid 47479778)
26. VS Warbey RE Ferner JT Dunn E Calonje MJ O'Doherty 2009 [18F] FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis of malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours in neurofibromatosis type-1 Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36 751 757 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXkt1ymsL8%3D 10.1007/s00259-008-1038-0 19142634
27. MH Schwarzbach A Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss G Mechtersheimer, et al. 2001 Assessment of soft tissue lesions suspicious for liposarcoma by F18-deoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) Anticancer Res 21 3609 3614 1:STN:280:DC%2BD387hsFWrsg%3D%3D 11848531
28. U Tateishi U Yamaguchi K Seki, et al. 2007 Bone and soft-tissue sarcoma: preoperative staging with fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT and conventional imaging Radiology 245 839 847 10.1148/radiol.2453061538 18024454 (Pubitemid 350127355)
29. MH Schwarzbach U Hinz A Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss, et al. 2005 Prognostic significance of preoperative [18-F] flourodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) imaging in patients with resectable soft tissue sarcomas Ann Surg 241 286 294 10.1097/01.sla.0000152663.61348.6f 15650639
30. A Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss LG Strauss MH Schwarzbach, et al. 2001 Dynamic PET 18F-FDG studies in patients with primary and recurrent soft-tissue sarcomas: impact on diagnosis and correlation with grading J Nucl Med 42 713 720 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MvkvVGitQ%3D%3D 11337565
31. JF Eary F O'Sullivan Y Powitan, et al. 2002 Sarcoma tumor FDG uptake measured by PET and patient outcome: a retrospective analysis Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 29 1149 1154 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD38Xmt1Cgtbs%3D 10.1007/s00259-002-0859-5 12192559 (Pubitemid 34985359)
32. MA Bredella GR Caputo LS Steinbach 2002 Value of FDG positron emission tomography in conjunction with MR imaging for evaluating therapy response in patients with musculoskeletal sarcomas Am J Roentgenol 179 1145 1150
33. V Evilevitch WA Weber WD Tap, et al. 2008 Reduction of glucose metabolic activity is more accurate than change in size at predicting histopathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas Clin Cancer Res 14 715 720 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXhsFyktro%3D 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-1762 18245531 (Pubitemid 351231152)
34. H Choi C Charnsangavej SC Faria, et al. 2007 Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria J Clin Oncol 25 1753 1759 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.3049 17470865 (Pubitemid 46797957)
35. GW Goerres R Stupp G Barghouth, et al. 2005 The value of PET, CT and in-line PET/CT in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours: long-term outcome of treatment with imatinib mesylate Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32 153 162 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2MXpsFyktQ%3D%3D 10.1007/s00259-004-1633-7 15690223 (Pubitemid 40248485)
36. I Gayed T Vu R Iyer, et al. 2004 The role of 18F-FDG PET in staging and early prediction of response to therapy of recurrent gastrointestinal stromal tumors J Nucl Med 45 17 21 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXht1artLY%3D 14734662
37. F Dehdashti BA Siegel LK Griffeth, et al. 1996 Benign versus malignant intraosseous lesions: discrimination by means of PET with 2-[F-18] flouro-2-deoxy-D-glucose Radiology 200 243 247 1:STN:280:DyaK283lslWluw%3D%3D 8657920
38. J Aoki H Watanabe T Shinozaki, et al. 2001 FDG PET of primary benign and malignant bone tumors: standardized uptake value in 52 lesions Radiology 219 774 777 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3Mzis1Grtw%3D%3D 11376267 (Pubitemid 32476270)
39. R Tian M Su Y Tian, et al. 2009 Dual-time point PET/CT with F-18 FDG for the differentiation of malignant and benign bone lesions Skeletal Radiol 38 451 458 10.1007/s00256-008-0643-0 19205695
40. H Zhuang M Pourdehnad ES Lambright, et al. 2001 Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes J Nucl Med 42 1412 1417 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3Mvptlersg%3D%3D 11535734
41. K Strobel UE Exner KD Stumpe, et al. 2008 The additional value of CT images interpretation in the differential diagnosis of benign vs. malignant primary bone lesions with 18F-FDG-PET/CT Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35 2000 2008 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1cnkvVOnug%3D%3D 10.1007/s00259-008-0876-0 18712385
42. W Brenner KH Bohuslavizki JF Eary 2003 PET imaging of osteosarcoma J Nucl Med 44 930 942 12791822
43. C Franzius J Sciuk HE Daldrup-Link H Jurgen O Schober 2000 FDG PET for detection of osseous metastases from malignant primary bone tumours: comparison with bone scintigraphy Eur J Nucl Med 27 1305 1311 1:STN:280: DC%2BD3cvltFyhsQ%3D%3D 10.1007/s002590000301 11007511
44. HE Daldrup-Link C Franzius TM Link, et al. 2001 Whole-body MR imaging for detection of bone metastases in children and young adults: comparison with skeletal scintigraphy and FDG PET Am J Roentgenol 177 229 236 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MznsFKluw%3D%3D
45. E Even-Sapir U Metser G Flusser, et al. 2004 Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: initial experience with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18F-fluoride PET and 18F-fluoride PET/CT J Nucl Med 45 272 278 14960647
46. C Franzius HE Daldrup-Link J Sciuk, et al. 2001 FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with spiral CT Ann Oncol 12 479 486 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MzjtFansw%3D%3D 10.1023/A:1011111322376 11398879 (Pubitemid 32472101)
47. MK Werner JA Parker GM Kolodny JR English MR Palmer 2009 Respiratory gating enhances imaging of pulmonary nodules and measurement of tracer uptake in FDG PET/CT Am J Roentgenol 193 1640 1645 10.2214/AJR.09.2516
48. GJ Cheon MS Kim JA Lee, et al. 2009 Prediction model of chemotherapy response in osteosarcoma by 18F-FDG PET and MRI J Nucl Med 50 1435 1440 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXhtFOrtbrP 10.2967/jnumed.109.063602 19690035
49. C Franzius J Sciuk C Brinkschmidt, et al. 2000 Evaluation of chemotherapy response in primary bone tumors with F-18 FDG PET compared with histologically assessed tumor necrosis Clin Nucl Med 25 874 881 1:STN:280: DC%2BD3M7islaltg%3D%3D 10.1097/00003072-200011000-00004 11079583
50. Z Ye J Zhu M Tian, et al. 2008 Response of osteogenic sarcoma to neoadjuvant therapy: evaluated by 18F-FDG-PET Ann Nucl Med 22 475 480 10.1007/s12149-008-0147-y 18670853
51. CM Costelloe HA Macapinlac JE Madewell, et al. 2009 18F-FDG PET/CT as an indicator of progression-free and overall survival in osteosarcoma J Nucl Med 50 340 347 10.2967/jnumed.108.058461 19258257
52. C Franzius HE Daldrup-Link A Wagner-Bohn, et al. 2002 FDG-PET for detection of recurrences from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with conventional imaging Ann Oncol 13 157 160 1:STN:280:DC%2BD387islymsQ%3D%3D 10.1093/annonc/mdf012 11863097 (Pubitemid 34436740)
53. JA Ludwig 2008 Ewing sarcoma: historical perspectives, current state-of-the-art, and opportunities for targeted therapy in the future Curr Opin Oncol 20 412 418 10.1097/CCO.0b013e328303ba1d 18525337
54. M Kleis H Daldrup-link K Matthay, et al. 2009 Diagnostic value of PET-CT for the staging and restaging of pediatric tumors Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36 23 36 10.1007/s00259-008-0911-1 18719909
55. T Völker T Denecke I Steffen, et al. 2007 Positron emission tomography for staging of pediatric sarcoma patients: results of a prospective multicenter trial J Clin Oncol 25 5435 5441 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.2473 18048826 (Pubitemid 350232220)
56. DS Hawkins JG Rajendran EU Conrad 3rd JD Bruckner JF Eary 2002 Evaluation of chemotherapy response in pediatric bone sarcomas by [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography Cancer 94 3277 3284 1:CAS:528: DC%2BD38Xltlyjsr0%3D 10.1002/cncr.10599 12115361 (Pubitemid 34670512)
57. MW Arush O Israel S Postovsky, et al. 2007 Positron emission tomography/computed tomography with 18-fluoro-deoxyglucose in the detection of local recurrence and distant metastases of pediatric sarcoma Pediatr Blood Cancer 49 901 905 10.1002/pbc.21150 17252575 (Pubitemid 350022442)
58. C Furth H Amthauer T Denecke J Ruf G Henze M Gutberlet 2006 Impact of whole body MRI and FDG-PET on staging and assessment of therapy response in a patient with Ewing sarcoma Paediatr Blood Cancer 47 607 611 1:STN:280: DC%2BD28rhslyrsw%3D%3D 10.1002/pbc.20662 (Pubitemid 44360062)
59. DS Hawkins SM Schuetze JE Butrynski, et al. 2005 [18F] Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts outcome for Ewing sarcoma family of tumors J Clin Oncol 23 8828 8834 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.7079 16314643 (Pubitemid 46211529)
60. HU Gerth KU Juergens U Dirksen J Gerss O Schober C Franzius 2007 Significant benefit of multimodal imaging: PET/CT compared with PET alone in staging and follow-up of patients with Ewing tumors J Nucl Med 48 1932 1939 10.2967/jnumed.107.045286 18006618 (Pubitemid 350237602)
61. 18FDG-PET applications for cartilage neoplasms Skeletal Radiol 34 367 374 10.1007/s00256-005-0894-y 15937711 (Pubitemid 40983496)
62. W Brenner EU Conrad JF Eary 2004 FDG PET imaging for grading and prediction of outcome in chondrosarcoma patients Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31 189 195 10.1007/s00259-003-1353-4 15129700 (Pubitemid 38173693)
63. FY Lee J Yu SS Chang R Fawwaz MV Parisien 2004 Diagnostic value and limitations of fluorine -18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for cartilaginous tumors of bone J Bone Joint Surg Am 86A 12 2677 2685
64. J Aoki H Watanabe T Shinozaki M Tokunaga T Inoue K Endo 1999 FDG-PET in differential diagnosis and grading of chondrosarcomas J Comput Assist Tomogr 23 603 608 1:STN:280:DyaK1MzmtVKktA%3D%3D 10.1097/00004728-199907000-00022 10433294 (Pubitemid 29337158)
65. P Kitsoulis M Vlychou A Papoudou-Bai, et al. 2006 Primary lymphomas of bone Anticancer Res 26 1A 325 337 16475714
66. YH Park S Kim SJ Choi, et al. 2005 Clinical impact of whole-body FDG-PET for evaluation of response and therapeutic decision-making of primary lymphoma of bone Ann Oncol 16 1401 1402 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2MzotFamtA%3D%3D 10.1093/annonc/mdi234 15870088 (Pubitemid 41158489)
67. TC Kwee RM Kwee RA Nievelstein 2008 Imaging in staging of malignant lymphoma: a systematic review Blood 111 504 516 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXns1Chug%3D%3D 10.1182/blood-2007-07-101899 17916746
68. M Hutchings SF Barrington 2009 PET/CT for therapy response assessment in lymphoma J Nucl Med 50 Suppl 1 21S 30S 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXmtFahsbw%3D 10.2967/jnumed.108.057190 19380407
69. YL Kasamon RL Wahl 2008 FDG PET and risk-adapted therapy in Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma Curr Opin Oncol 20 206 219 10.1097/CCO.0b013e3282f5123d 18300772 (Pubitemid 351317410)
70. International Myeloma Working Group 2003 Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group Br J Haematol 121 5 749 757 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2003.04355.x (Pubitemid 36718191)
71. M Dimopoulos E Terpos RL Comenzo, et al. 2009 International Myeloma Working Group consensus statement and guidelines regarding the current role of imaging techniques in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple myeloma Leukemia 23 1545 1556 1:STN:280:DC%2BD1MngvFamsA%3D%3D 10.1038/leu.2009.89 19421229
72. RJ Breyer 3rd ME Mulligan SE Smith BR Line AZ Badros 2006 Comparison of imaging with FDG PET/CT with other imaging modalities in myeloma Skeletal Radiol 35 632 640 10.1007/s00256-006-0127-z 16758246 (Pubitemid 44194492)
73. H Jadvar PS Conti 2002 Diagnostic utility of FDG PET in multiple myeloma Skeletal Radiol 31 690 694 10.1007/s00256-002-0580-2 12483429 (Pubitemid 36104567)
74. C Nanni E Zamagni M Farsad, et al. 2006 Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the assessment of bone involvement in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: preliminary results Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33 525 531 10.1007/s00259-005-0004-3 16453155
75. MA Bredella L Steinbach G Caputo G Segall R Hawkins 2005 Value of FDG-PET in the assessment of patients with multiple myeloma Am J Roentgenol 184 1199 1204
76. CP Shortt TG Gleeson KA Breen, et al. 2009 Whole-body MRI versus PET in assessment of multiple myeloma disease activity Am J Roentgenol 192 980 986 10.2214/AJR.08.1633
77. A Baur-Melnyk S Buhmann C Becker, et al. 2008 Whole-body MRI versus whole-body MDCT for staging of multiple myeloma Am J Roentgenol 190 1097 1104 10.2214/AJR.07.2635 (Pubitemid 351571514)
78. TB Bartel J Haessler TL Brown, et al. 2009 F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma Blood 114 10 2068 2076 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXhtFKksLrM 10.1182/blood-2009-03-213280 19443657
79. PJ Kim RJ Hicks A Wirth, et al. 2009 Impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography before and after definitive radiation therapy in patients with apparently solitary plasmacytoma Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74 3 740 746 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXmsFyiu7c%3D 19038505
80. AK Buck K Herrmann CM Büschenfelde, et al. 2008 Imaging bone and soft tissue tumors with the proliferation marker [18F] fluorodeoxythymidine Clin Cancer Res 14 2970 2977 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXmtVCmtL0%3D 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR- 07-4294 18445694
81. H Watanabe T Inoue T Shinozaki, et al. 2000 PET imaging of musculoskeletal tumors with fluorine-18 alpha-methyltyrosine: comparison with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET Eur J Nucl Med 27 1509 1517 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3cXotVyrs7c%3D 10.1007/s002590000344 11083540
82. GC Toner RJ Hicks 2008 PET for sarcomas other than gastrointestinal stromal tumors Oncologist 13 Suppl 2 22 26 10.1634/theoncologist.13-S2-22 18434635
83. T Yanagawa H Watanabe T Inoue, et al. 2003 Carbon-11 choline positron emission tomography in musculoskeletal tumors: comparison with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography J Comput Assist Tomogr 27 175 182 10.1097/00004728-200303000-00013 12703009 (Pubitemid 37047214)
84. T Inoue EE Kim FC Wong, et al. 1996 Comparison of F18 FDG and C11 methionine PET in detection of malignant tumors J Nucl Med 37 1472 1476 1:CAS:528:DyaK28XlvF2msbo%3D 8790196
85. C Nanni E Zamagni M Cavo, et al. 2007 11C-choline vs. 18F-FDG PET/CT in assessing bone involvement in patients with multiple myeloma World J Surg Oncol 5 68 10.1186/1477-7819-5-68 17584499 (Pubitemid 47108285)
86. G Ghigi R Micera AM Maffione, et al. 2009 11C-methionine vs. 18F-FDG PET in soft tissue sarcoma patients treated with neo-adjuvant therapy; preliminary results In Vivo 23 1 105 110 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXktlKjt7w%3D 19368133
87. GK Von Schulthess HP Schlemmer 2009 A look ahead: PET/MR versus PET/CT Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36 Suppl1 S3 S9 10.1007/s00259-008-0940-9
88. G Antoch A Bockisch 2009 Combined PET/MRI: a new dimension in whole-body oncology imaging Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36 Suppl1 S113 120 10.1007/s00259-008-0951-6 19104802
89. HP Schlemmer BJ Pichler R Krieg WD Heiss 2009 An integrated MR/PET system: prospective applications Abdom Imaging 34 668 674 10.1007/s00261-008- 9450-2 18773235