Established, emerging and future applications of FDG-PET/CT in the uterine cancer

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 66, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 297-307

  Kitajima, K ^a   Murakami, K ^b   Kaji, Y ^c   Sakamoto, S ^c   Sugimura, K ^d  

^a INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH AND INNOVATION   (Japan)

^b KEIO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^c DOKKYO MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^d KOBE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CHOLINE C 11; CISPLATIN; DIURETIC AGENT; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; FUROSEMIDE; METHIONINE C 11;

CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DRUG UPTAKE; ENDOMETRIUM CANCER; EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY; HUMAN; INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; LYMPHADENECTOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVARY CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERUS CANCER;

FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE NEOPLASMS;

EID: 79952313806     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2010.07.012     Document Type: Review

References (87)

1. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1369-79. (Pubitemid 30643379)
2. Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1200-9. (Pubitemid 39655178)
3. von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC, Hany TF. Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions. Radiology 2006;238:405-22. (Pubitemid 43134354)
4. Patel CN, Goldstone AR, Chowdhury FU, et al. FDG PET/CT in oncology: "rasing the bar". Clin Radiol 2010;65:522-35.
5. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrast enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDG-PET/non-contrast enhanced CT and enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1439-48.
6. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in staging ovarian cancer: comparison with enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1912-20.
7. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrast enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent uterine cancer: comparison with PET alone and enhanced CT alone. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36:362-71.
8. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with uterine cancer. Eur Radiol 2009;19:1529-36.
9. Kitajima K, Suzuki K, Nakamoto Y. Low-dose non-enhanced CT versus full-dose contrast-enhanced CT in integrated PET/CT studies for the diagnosis of uterine cancer recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37:1490-8.
10. Bunyaviroch T, Turkington TG, Wong TZ, et al. Quantitative effects of contrast enhanced CT attenuation correction on PET SUV measurements. Mol Imaging Biol 2008;10:107-13.
11. Office for National Statistics. Cancer statistics registrations: registrations of cancer diagnosed; 2007. England. Series MB1 no.38.2010.
12. Namimoto T, Awai K, Nakaura T, et al. Role of diffusion-weighted imaging in the diagnosis of gynecological diseases. Eur Radiol 2009;19:745-60.
13. Noguchi H, Shizawa I, Sakai Y, et al. Pelvic lymph node metastasis of uterine cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 1987;27:150-8. (Pubitemid 17065824)
14. Inoue T, Morita K. The prognostic significance of number of positive nodes in cervical carcinoma stage IB, IIA, and IIB. Cancer 1990;65:1923-7. (Pubitemid 20147629)
15. Stehman FB, Bundy BN, DiSaia PJ, et al. Carcinoma of the cervix treated with radiation therapy: a multivariate analysis of prognostic variables in the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Cancer 1991;67:2776-85.
16. Cosin JA, Fowler JM, Chen MD, et al. Pretreatment surgical staging of patients with cervical carcinoma: the case for lymph node debulking. Cancer 1998;82:2241-8. (Pubitemid 28240832)
17. Lai CH, Hong JH, Hsueh S, et al. Preoperative prognostic variables and the impact of postoperative adjuvant therapy on the outcome of stage IB and II cervical carcinoma patients with or without pelvic lymph-node metastases: an analysis of 891 cases. Cancer 1999;85:1537-46. (Pubitemid 29152826)
18. Gigsby PW, Heydon K, Mutch DG, et al. Long-term follow-up of RTOG 92-10: cervical cancer with positive para-aortic lymph nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;51:982-7. (Pubitemid 33026428)
19. Lagasse LD, Creasman WT, Shingleton HM, et al. Results and complications of operative staging in cervical cancer: experience of the Gynecologic Oncology Group. Gynecol Oncol 1980;9:90-8. (Pubitemid 10175950)
20. Pandit-Taskar N. Oncologic imaging in gynecologic malignances. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1842-50.
21. Morris M, Eifel PJ, Lu J, et al. Pelvic radiation with concurrent chemotherapy compared with pelvic and para-aortic radiation for high-risk cervical cancer. N Engl J Med 1999;340:1137-43. (Pubitemid 29177872)
22. Hricak H, Gatsonis C, Coakley FV, et al. Early invasive cervical cancer: CT and MR imaging in preoperative evaluation-ACRIN/GOG comparative study of diagnostic performance and interobserver variability. Radiology 2007;245:491-8. (Pubitemid 47612531)
23. Choi HJ, Roh JW, Seo SS, et al. Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and positron/emission tomography in the presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma. Cancer 2006;106:914-22. (Pubitemid 43238460)
24. Lin G, Ho KC, Wang JJ, et al. Detection of lymph node metastasis in cervical and uterine cancers by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 2008;28:128-35. (Pubitemid 351956475)
25. Sironi S, Buda A, Picchio M, et al. Lymph node metastasis in patients with clinical early-stage cervical cancer: detection with integrated FDG PET/CT. Radiology 2006;238:272-9. (Pubitemid 43010605)
26. Amit A, Beck D, Lowenstein L, et al. The role of hybrid PET/CT in the evaluation of patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2006;100:65-9. (Pubitemid 41815051)
27. Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Roed H, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT scanning in patients with cervical cancer: a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2007;106:29-34. (Pubitemid 46908743)
28. Yildirim Y, Sehirali S, Avci ME, et al. Integrated PET/CT for the evaluation of para-aortic nodal metastasis in locally advanced cervical cancer patients with negative conventional CT findings. Gynecol Oncol 2008;108:154-9. (Pubitemid 350299438)
29. Chung HH, Park NH, Kim JW, et al. Role of integrated PET-CT in pelvic lymph node staging of cervical cancer before radical hysterectomy. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2009;67:61-6.
30. Boughanim M, Leboulleux S, Rey A, et al. Histologic results of para-aortic lymphadenectomy in patients treated for stage IB2/II cervical cancer with negative [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scans in the para-aortic area. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2558-61.
31. Stryker JA, Mortel R. Survival following extended field irradiation in carcinoma of cervix metastatic to para-aortic lymph nodes. Gynecol Oncol 2000;79:399-405.
32. Lin LL, Mutic S, Low DA, et al. Adaptive brachytherapy treatment planning for cervical cancer using FDG-PET. Int J Radiat Oncol Bio Phys 2007;67:91-6. (Pubitemid 44959479)
33. Esthappan J, Chaudhari S, Santanam L, et al. Prospective clinical trial of positron emission tomography/computed tomography image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy for cervical carcinoma with positive para-aortic lymph nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Bio Phys 2008;72:1134-9.
34. 18FDG PET imaging in the management of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2002;87:90-7.
35. Chao A, Ho KC, Wang CC, et al. Positron emission tomography in evaluating the feasibility of curative intent in cervical cancer patients with limited distant lymph node metastases. Gynecol Oncol 2008;110:172-8.
36. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. The standardized uptake value for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose is a sensitive predictive biomarker for cervical cancer treatment response and survival. Cancer 2007;110:1738-44. (Pubitemid 47557298)
37. Xue F, Li LL, Dehdashti F, et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in primary cervical cancer as an indicator prognosis after radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;53:353-9.
38. Lee YY, Choi CH, Kim CJ, et al. The prognostic of the SUV max (maximum standardized uptake value for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose) of the cervical tumor in PET imaging for early cervical cancer: preliminary results. Gynecol Oncol 2009;115:65-8.
39. Singh AK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, et al. FDG-PET lymph node staging and survival of patients with FIGO stage IIIb cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Bio Phys 2003;56:489-93. (Pubitemid 36542908)
40. Yen TC, See LC, Lai CH, et al. Standardized uptake value in para-aortic lymph node is a significant prognostic factor in patients with primary advanced squamous cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35:493-501.
41. Hope AJ, Saha P, Grigsby PW. FDG-PET in carcinoma of the uterine cervix with endometrial extension. Cancer 2006;106:196-200. (Pubitemid 43032565)
42. Disaia PJ, Creasman WT. Clinical gynecologic oncology. 6th ed. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 2001. pp. 89-93.
43. Chung HH, Jo H, Kang WJ, et al. Clinical impact of integrated PET/CT on the management of suspected cervical cancer recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 2007;104:529-34. (Pubitemid 46240239)
44. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Performance of FDG-PET/CT for diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer. Eur Radiol 2008;18:2040-7.
45. Mittra E, EI-Maghraby T, Rodriguez CA, et al. Efficacy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of patients with recurrent cervical carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging (in press). doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1206-x.
46. Sironi S, Picchio M, Landoni C, et al. Post-therapy surveillance of patients with uterine cancer: value of integrated PET/CT in the detection of recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:472-9. (Pubitemid 46426981)
47. Grigsby PW. The role of FDG-PET/CT imaging after radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol 2007;107:27-9.
48. 18FDG in radiotherapy treatment planning and in the prediction in patients with cervix carcinoma - results of pilot study. Neoplasma 2008;55:437-41.
49. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose- positron emission tomography evaluation of early metabolic response during radiation therapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radia Oncol Biol Phys 2008;72:1502-7.
50. Lin LL, Yang Z, Mutic S, et al. FDG-PET imaging for the assessment of physiologic volume response during radiotherapy in cervix cancer. Int J Radia Oncol Biol Phys 2005;65:177-81.
51. Unger JB, lvy JJ, Connor P, et al. Detection of recurrent cervical cancer by whole-body FDG PET scan in asymptomatic and symptomatic women. Gynecol Oncol 2004;94:212-6.
52. Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Kaneishi K, et al. Monitoring the neoadjuvant therapy response in gynecological cancer patients using FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:287-95.
53. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in carcinoma of the cervix: response and outcome. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2167-71.
54. Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma. JAMA 2007;298:2289-95. (Pubitemid 350146219)
55. Lin LL, Yang Z, Mutic S, et al. FDG-PET imaging for the assessment of physiologic volume response during radiotherapy in cervix cancer. Bio Phys 2006;65:177-81.
56. Office for national statistics. Cancer statistics registrations: registrations of cancer diagnosed 2006. England. Series MB1 no.36.2008.
57. Boronow RC, Morrow CP, Creasman WT, et al. Surgical staging in endometrial cancer; clinicalepathologic findings in a prospective study. Obstet Gynecol 1984;63:825-32.
58. Creasman WT, Morrow CP, Bundy BN, et al. Surgical pathologic spread patterns of endometrial cancer. Cancer 1987;60:2035-41.
59. Shen SH, Chiou YY, Wang JH, et al. Diffusion-weighted single-shot echoplanar imaging with parallel technique in assessment of endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:481-8.
60. Takeuchi M, Matsuzaki K, Nishitani H. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of endometrial cancer: differentiation from benign endometrial lesions and preoperative assessment of myometrial invasion. Acta Radiol 2008;49:1195-9.
61. Manetta A, Delgado G, Petrilli E, et al. The significance of paraaortic node status in carcinoma of the cervix and endometrium. Gynecol Oncol 1986;23:284-90. (Pubitemid 16129939)
62. Signorelli M, Guerra L, Buda A, et al. Role of the integrated FDG PET/CT in the surgical management of patients with high risk clinically early stage endometrial cancer: detection of pelvic nodal metastases. Gynecol Oncol 2009;115:231-5.
63. Rockall AG, Sohaib SA, Harisinghani MG, et al. Diagnostic performance of nanoparticle-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of lymph node metastases in patients with endometrial and cervical cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:2813-21. (Pubitemid 46179472)
64. Rockall AG, Meroni R, Sohaib SA, et al. Evaluation of endometrial carcinoma on magnetic resonance imaging. In J Gynecol Cancer 2007;17:188-96. (Pubitemid 46213990)
65. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Accuracy of FDG PET/CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1652-8. (Pubitemid 351798544)
66. Park JY, Kim EN, Kim DY, et al. Comparison of the validity of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the preoperative evaluation of patient with uterine corpus cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2008;108:486-92.
67. Nayot D, Kwon JS, Carey MS, et al. Does preoperative positron emission tomography with computed tomography predict nodal status in endometrial cancer? A pilot study. Curr Oncol 2008;15:123-5.
68. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, et al. Performance of FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent endometrial cancer. Ann Nucl Med 2008;22:103-9. (Pubitemid 351328965)
69. 18F]FDG PET/CT for the management of recurrent endometrial cancer: correlation with clinical and histological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1081-8.
70. Park JY, Kim EN, Kim DY, et al. Clinical impact of positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the posttherapy surveillance of endometrial carcinoma: evaluation of 88 patients. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2008;18:1332-8.
71. Kumar R, Chauhan A, Jana S, et al. Positron emission tomography in gynaecological malignancies. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2006;6:1033-44. (Pubitemid 44203381)
72. 18FDG PET with bladder irrigation in patients with uterine and ovarian tumors. J Nucl Med 2003;44:353-8.
73. Prakash P, Cronin CG, Blake MA. PET/CT in ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:W464-70.
74. Domingues RC, Carneiro MP, Lopes FCR, et al. Whole-body MRI and Fdg PET fused images for evaluation of patients with cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:1012-20.
75. Lapela M, Leskinen-Kallio S, Varpula M, et al. Imaging of uterine carcinoma by C11-methionine and PET. J Nucl Med 1994;35:1618-23. (Pubitemid 24307756)
76. Torizuka K, Kanno T, Futatsubashi M, et al. Imaging of gynaecologic tumor: comparison of 11C-Choline PET with 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1051-6. (Pubitemid 39663379)
77. Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW, Mintun MA, et al. Assessing tumor hypoxia in cervical cancer by positron emission tomography with 60Cu-ATSM: relationship to therapeutic response - a preliminary report. Int J Radiat Ocol Biol Phys 2003;55:1233-8. (Pubitemid 36338289)
78. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PETdinitial experience. Radioloy 2008;248:599-605.
79. 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2009;50:1598-604.
80. 15O-PET for investigating perfusion changes in pelvic tumors due to regional hyperthermia. Int J Hyperthermia 2009;25:299-308.
81. Antoch G, Bockisch A. Combined PET/MRI: a new dimension in whole-body oncology imaging? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36 (Suppl. 1):S113-20.
82. Pichler BJ, Kolb A, Nagele T, et al. PET/MRI: paving the way for the next generation of clinical multimodality imaging applications. J Nucl Med 2010;51:333-6.
83. Pichler BJ, Wehrl HF, Kolb A, et al. Positron emission tomography/ magnetic resonance imaging: the next generation of multimodality imaging? Semin Nucl Med 2008;38:199-208.
84. Delso G, Ziegler S. PET/MRI system designs. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36:S86-92.
85. Von Schulthess GK, Schlemmer HP. A look ahead: PET/MR versus PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36:S3-9.
86. Hofmann M, Pichler B, Scholkopf HP, et al. Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36:S93-104.
87. Martinez-Moller A, Souvatzoglou M, Delso G, et al. Tissue classification as a potential approach for attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MRI: evaluation with PET/CT data. J Nucl Med 2009;50:520-6.