Detection of recurrence in glioma: A comparative prospective study between Tc-99m GHA SPECT and F-18 FDG PET/CT

Clinical Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 36, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 650-655

  Santra, Amburanjan ^a   Kumar, Rakesh ^b   Sharma, Punit ^b   Bal, Chandrashekhar ^b   Julka, Pramod Kumar ^b   Malhotra, Arun ^b  

^a MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL   (India)

^b ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (India)

Author keywords

glioma; glucoheptonate; PET CT; recurrence; SPECT

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GLUCEPTATE TC 99M; PERTECHNETIC ACID TC 99M;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ASTROCYTOMA; CANCER PATIENT; CHILD; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GLIOMA; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; REVIEW; SCHOOL CHILD; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; TUMOR DIAGNOSIS; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHILD; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; GLIOMA; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANOTECHNETIUM COMPOUNDS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RECURRENCE; SUGAR ACIDS; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED, SINGLE-PHOTON; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79960221383     PISSN: 03639762     EISSN: 15360229     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e318217aee0     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Kristiansen K, Hagen S, Kolleyvold T, et al. Combined modality therapy of operated astrocytoma grade 3 and 4: confirmation of the value of postoper¬ative irradiation and lack of potentiation of bleomycin on survival time: a prospective multicentre trial of the Scandanavian Glioblastoma Study Group. Cancer. 1981;47:649-652. (Pubitemid 11135858)
2. Mahoney DH Jr, Strother D, Camitta B, et al. High-dose melphalan and cyclophosphamide with autologous bone marrow rescue for recurrent/ pro¬gressive malignant brain tumors in children: a pilot pediatric oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:382-388.
3. Dooms GC, Hecht S, Brant-Zawadzki M, et al. Brain radiation lesions: MR imaging. Radiology. 1986;158:149-155. (Pubitemid 16172308)
4. Mikhael MA. Radiation necrosis of the brain: correlation between, computed tomography, pathology and dose distribution. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1978; 2: 71-80. (Pubitemid 8260660)
5. Kingsley DP, Kendall BE. CT of the adverse effects of therapeutic radiation of the central nervous system. Am JNeuroradiol. 1981;2:453-460. (Pubitemid 12246383)
6. Van Dellen JR, Danziger A. Failure of computerized tomography to differ¬entiate between radiation necrosis and cerebral tumour. S Afr Med J. 1978; 53:171-172. (Pubitemid 8298180)
7. Valk PE, Dillon WP. Radiation injury of the brain. Am J Neuroradiol. 1991;12:45-62.
8. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography in the evaluation of radiation necrosis of the brain. Radiology. 1982;144:885-889. (Pubitemid 12049740)
9. 18F]FDG and 82Rb positron emission tomography. J Comp Assist Tomogr. 1987;11:563-570. (Pubitemid 17104751)
10. Khalkhali I, Maublant JC, Goldsmith J. Nuclear Oncology, Diagnosis and Therapy. Vol 10. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincort Williams & Winkins; 2001: 159-182.
11. Kaschten B, Stevenaert A, Sadzot B, et al. Preoperative evaluation of 54 gliomas by PET with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose and/or carbon-11-me-thionine. JNucl Med. 1998;39:778-785. (Pubitemid 28216722)
12. 99mTechnetium glucoheptonate in brain-tumor detection: an important advance in radiotracer techniques. JNucl Med. 1977;18:957-961.
13. 99mTc glucoheptonateas a brain scanning agent. JNuci Med. 1977;18:630.
14. 99m-glucoheptonate SPECT for evaluation of recurrent brain tumours: a within-subject comparison with pathological correlation. Clin Neurosci. 2005; 12:27-31. (Pubitemid 40082615)
15. Barai S, Bandopadhayaya GP, Julka PK, et al. Role of Tc-glucoheptonic acid brain single photon emission computed tomography in differentiation of recurrent brain tumour and post-radiation gliosis. Australas Radiol. 2004;48: 296-301. (Pubitemid 39421070)
16. 99m-glucoheptonate. J Postgrad Med. 2004;50:89-93. (Pubitemid 39069757)
17. Di Chiro G, Oldfield E, Wright DC, et al. Cerebral necrosis after radiation therapy and or intra-arterial chemotherapy for brain tumor: PE neuropathol-ogy study. Am JRoentgenol. 1988;150:189-197.
18. Chao ST, Suh JH, Raja S, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET in distinguishing recurrent brain tumor from radiation necrosis in patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery. Int J Cancer. 2001;96:191-197. (Pubitemid 32520674)
19. 18F] fluorodeoxy-glucose uptake in an experimental tumour model. Nucl Med Commun. 2004;25:727-730. (Pubitemid 38901691)
20. Delbeke D, Meyerowitz C, Lapidus RL, et al. Optimum cut off levels of FDG uptake in differentiation of low grade from high grade brain tumors with PET. Radiology. 1995;195:47-52.
21. Alavi JB, Alavi A, Chawluk J, et al. PET in patients of glioma, a predictor of prognosis. Cancer. 1988;62:1074-1078.
22. Valk PE, Budinger TF, Levin VA, et al. PET of malignant cerebral tumors after interstitial brachytherapy: demonstration of metabolic activity and cor¬relation with clinical outcome. JNeurosurg. 1988;69:830-838.
23. Kim EE, Chung SK, Haynie TP, et al. Differentiation of residual or recurrent tumors from post-treatment changes with F-18 FDG PET. Radiographics. 1992;12:269-279.
24. 18F]fluoro- deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with primary malignant brain tumors. Ann Neurol. 1993;33:540-548. (Pubitemid 23143040)
25. 18F]2-fluoro-2- deoxyglucose positron emission tomography correlation of gadolinium-enhanced MR im¬aging of central nervous system neoplasia. Am J Neuroradiol. 1993;14:515-523.
26. 18F-FDG PET. Am J Roentgenol. 1994;163:1459-1465.
27. Ricci PE, Karis JP, Heiserman JE, et al. Differentiating recurrent tumor from radiation necrosis: time for re-evaluation of positron emission tomography? Am J Neuroradiol. 1998;9:407-413. (Pubitemid 30422740)
28. Langleben DD, Segall GM. PET in differentiation of recurrent brain tumor from radiation injury. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1861-1867.
29. Wang SX, Boethius J, Ericson K FDG-PET on irradiated brain tumor: ten years' summary. Acta Radiol. 2006;47:85-90. (Pubitemid 43177535)
30. Gómez-Río M, Rodríguez-Fernandez A, Ramos-Font C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 201Thallium-SPECT and 18F-FDG-PET in the clinical assess¬ment of glioma recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:966-975.
31. Ozsunar Y, Mullins ME, Kwong K, et al. Glioma recurrence versus radiation necrosis? A pilot comparison of arterial spin-labeled, dynamic susceptibility contrast enhanced MRI, and FDG-PET imaging. Acad Radiol. 2010;17:282-290.
32. Tripathi M, Sharma R, D'Souza M, et al. Comparative evaluation of F-18 FDOPA, F-18 FDG, and F-18 FLT-PET/CT for metabolic imaging of low grade gliomas. Clin Nucl Med. 2009;34:878-883.
33. Chen W, Silverman DH, Delaloye S, et al. F-18-FDOPA PET imaging of brain tumors: comparison study with F-18-FDG PET and evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:904-911. (Pubitemid 46939941)
34. Shields A, Grierson J, Dohmen B, et al. Imaging proliferation in vivo with F-18-FLT and positron emission tomography. Nat Med. 1998;4:1334-1336. (Pubitemid 28512118)
35. Chen W, Cloughesy T, Kamdar N, et al. Imaging proliferation in brain tumors with F-18-FLT PET: comparison with F-18-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:945-952. (Pubitemid 43733508)
36. Ziesman HA, O' Malley JP, Thrall JH. Nuclear Medicine: The Requisites in Radiology. Vol. 13. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Mosby; 2006:419-449