Usefulness of F-18 FDG PET/CT in assessment of recurrence of cervical cancer after treatment

Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 111-116

  Lee, Minkyung ^a   Lee, Yukyung ^a   Hwang, Kyung Hoon ^a   Choe, Wonsick ^b   Park, Chan Yong ^a  

^a Gachon University   (South Korea)

^b School of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; PET CT; Recurrence

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER RECURRENCE; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METASTASIS; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

EID: 79960073498     PISSN: 18693474     EISSN: 18693482     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13139-010-0059-3     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani PD. Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer. 2001;94:153-6.
2. Bodurka-Bevers D, Morris M, Eifel PJ, Levenback C, Bevers MW, Lucas KR, et al. Posttherapy surveillance of women with cervical cancer: an outcomes analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;78:187-93.
3. Disaia PJ, Creasman WT. Clinical gynecologic oncology. 6th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2001. p. 89-93.
4. Connor JP, Andrews JI, Anderson B, Buller RE. Computed tomography in endometrial carcinoma. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95:692-6.
5. Ebner F, Kressel HY, Mintz MC, Carlson JA, Cohen EK, Schiebler M, et al. Tumor recurrence versus fibrosis in the female pelvis: differentiation with MR imaging at 1.5T. Radiology. 1988;166:333-40.
6. Hricak H, Yu KK. Radiology in invasive cervical cancer. Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167:1101-8.
7. Delbeke D. Oncological applications of FDG PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1706-15.
8. Kostakoglu L, Agress Jr H, Goldsmith SJ. Clinical role of FDG PET in evaluation of cancer patients. Radiographics. 2003;23:315-40.
9. Anzai Y, Carroll WR, Quint DJ, Bradford CR, Minoshima S, Wolf GT, et al. Recurrence of head and neck cancer after surgery or irradiation: prospective comparison of 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluroro-Dglucose PET and MR imaging diagnoses. Radiology. 1996;200:135-41.
10. Gritters LS, Francis IR, Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Initial assessment of positron emission tomography using 2-fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in the imaging of malignant melanoma. J Nucl Med. 1993;34:1420-7.
11. Van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, Van den Bergh JH, Schreurs AJ, Stallaert RA, et al. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomized trial. Lancet. 2002;359:1388-93.
12. Waggnoner SE. Cervical cancer. Lancet. 2003;361:2217-25.
13. Weber TM, Sostman HD, Spritzer CE, Ballard RL, Meyer GA, Clarke-Pearson DL, et al. Cervical carcinoma: determination of recurrent tumor extent versus radiation changes with MR imaging. Radiology. 1995;194:135-9.
14. Hanato K, Sekiya Y, Araki H, Sakai M, Togawa T, Narita Y, et al. Evaluation of the therapeutic effect of radiotherapy on cervical cancer using magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45:639-44.
15. Yu KK, Forstner R, Hricak H. Cervical carcinoma: role of imaging. Abdom Imaging. 1997;22:208-15.
16. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, Kinahan PE, Charron M, Roddy R, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369-79.
17. 18F-FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:347-52.
18. Park DH, Kim KH, Park SY, Lee BH, Choi CW, Chin SY. Diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer: computed tomography versus positron emission tomography. Korean J Radiol. 2000;1:51-5.
19. 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of recurrent cervical cancer. Anticancer Res. 2001;21:2957-61.
20. Havrilesky LJ, Wong TZ, Secord AA, Berchuck A, Clarke-Pearson DL, Jones EL. The role of PET scanning in the detection of recurrent cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;90:186-90.
21. Nakamoto Y, Eisbruch A, Achytyes ED, Sugawara Y, Reynolds KR, Johnston CM, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography using F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Gynecol Oncol. 2002;84:289-95.
22. Han YM, Choe JG, Kang BC. Role of FDG-PET in the diagnosis of recurrence and assessment of therapeutic response in cervical cancer and ovarian cancer patients: comparison of diagnostic report between PET, abdominal CT and tumor marker. Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;42(3):201-8.
23. Chung HH, Jo H, Kang WJ, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, et al. Clinical impact of integrated PET/CT on the management of suspected cervical recurrence. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;104:529-34.
24. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Domeki Y, Kaji Y, Sigimura K. Performance of FDG-PET/CT for diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:2040-7.
25. Shim SS, Lee KS, Kim BT, Chung MJ, Lee EJ, Han J, et al. Nonsmall cell lung cancer: Preoperative staging. Radiology. 2005;236:111-9.
26. Townsend DW. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med. 2008;38(3):152.
27. Budinger TF, Brennan KM, Moses WW, Derenzo SE. Advances in positron tomography for oncology. Nucl Med Biol. 1996;23(6):659-67.
28. Boussion N, Hatt M, Lamare F, Rest CC, Visvikis D. Contrast enhancement in emission tomography by way of synergistic PET/ CT image combination. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2008;90(3):191-201.