FDG-PET/CT as a molecular biomarker in ovarian cancer

Cancer Biomarkers

Volumn 8, Issue 4-5, 2010, Pages 167-175

  Nowosinska, Ewa ^a   Avril, Stefanie ^a   Murray, Iain ^a   Szyszko, Teresa ^a   Avril, Norbert ^a  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

diagnosis; FDG PET; ovarian cancer; PET; PET CT; staging; treatment monitoring

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER; CA 125 ANTIGEN; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; MOLECULAR MARKER; TUMOR MARKER;

ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; DRUG UPTAKE; FEMALE; GYNECOLOGIC CANCER; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVARY CANCER; PATIENT MONITORING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; TREATMENT PLANNING; ULTRASOUND;

FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NEOPLASM STAGING; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; RECURRENCE;

EID: 81155125990     PISSN: 15740153     EISSN: 18758592     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/CBM-2011-0219     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. N. Avril, GLUT1 expression in tissue and F-18 FDG uptake, J NuclMed 45 (2004), 930-932. (Pubitemid 47611678)
2. E.M. Rohren, T.G. Turkington and R.E. Coleman, Clinical applications of PET in oncology, Radiology 231 (2004), 305-332. (Pubitemid 38552885)
3. D.W. Townsend, J.P. Carney, J.T. Yap et al., PET/CT today and tomorrow, J NuclMed 45 (2004), 4S-14S.
4. T. Beyer, D.W. Townsend, T. Brun et al., A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology, J Nucl Med 41 (2000), 1369-1379. (Pubitemid 30643379)
5. N.E. Avril andW.A.Weber, Monitoring response to treatment in patients utilizing PET, Radiol Clin North Am 43 (2005), 189-204. (Pubitemid 40326568)
6. K.R. Zasadny and R.L. Wahl, Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy- D-glucose: variations with body weight and a method for correction, Radiology 189 (1993), 847-850. (Pubitemid 23354506)
7. H.Minn, K.R. Zasadny, L.E. Quint et al., Lung cancer: reproducibility of quantitative measurements for evaluating 2-[F- 18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose uptake at PET, Radiology 196 (1995), 167-173.
8. W.A.Weber, S.I. Ziegler, R. Thodtmann et al., Reproducibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET, J NuclMed 40 (1999), 1771-1777. (Pubitemid 29523568)
9. D.Grab, F. Flock, I. Stohr et al., Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography, Gynecol Oncol 77 (2000), 454-459. (Pubitemid 30368567)
10. A. Rieber, K. Nussle, I. Stohr et al., Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors withMR imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings, AJR Am J Roentgenol 177 (2001), 123-129. (Pubitemid 32578064)
11. S. Fenchel, D. Grab, K. Nuessle et al., Asymptomatic adnexal masses: correlation of FDGPET and histopathologic findings, Radiology 223 (2002), 780-788. (Pubitemid 34547598)
12. P. Castellucci, A.M. Perrone, M. Picchio et al., Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology, Nucl Med Commun 28 (2007), 589-595. (Pubitemid 47067045)
13. P.O. van Trappen, B.D. Rufford, T.D. Mills et al., Differential diagnosis of adnexal masses: risk of malignancy index, ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, and radioimmunoscintigraphy, Int J Gynecol Cancer 17 (2007), 61-67. (Pubitemid 46213971)
14. L.R. Medeiros, D.D. Rosa, M.I. da Rosa et al., Accuracy of ultrasonography with color Doppler in ovarian tumor: a systematic quantitative review, Int J Gynecol Cancer 19 (2009), 230-236.
15. S. Adusumilli, H.K. Hussain, E.M. Caoili et al., MRI of sonographically indeterminate adnexal masses, AJR Am J Roentgenol 187 (2006), 732-740. (Pubitemid 44651498)
16. K. Kinkel, Y. Lu, A. Mehdizade et al., Indeterminate ovarian mass at US: incremental value of second imaging test for characterization-meta-analysis and Bayesian analysis, Radiology 236 (2005), 85-94. (Pubitemid 40853299)
17. K. Kawahara, Y. Yoshida, T. Kurokawa et al., Evaluation of positron emission tomography with tracer 18- fluorodeoxyglucose in addition to magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer in selected women after ultrasonography, JComput Assist Tomogr 28 (2004), 505-516. (Pubitemid 38988818)
18. S. Risum, C. Hogdall, A. Loft et al., The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer-a prospective study, Gynecol Oncol 105 (2007), 145-149. (Pubitemid 46454333)
19. E.J. Nam, M.J. Yun, Y.T. Oh et al., Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT,Doppler US, and CT or MRI, Gynecol Oncol 116 (2010), 389-394.
20. W. Römer, N. Avril, J. Dose et al., Metabolic characterization of ovarian tumors with positron-emission tomography and F- 18 fluorodeoxyglucose, Rofo 166 (1997), 62-68. (Pubitemid 27094955)
21. S.K. Kim, K.W. Kang, J.W. Roh et al., Incidental ovarian 18FFDG accumulation on PET: correlation with the menstrual cycle, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32 (2005), 757-763.
22. S. Nishizawa, M. Inubushi and H. Okada, Physiological 18FFDG uptake in the ovaries and uterus of healthy female volunteers, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 32 (2005), 549-556. (Pubitemid 41214197)
23. N. Subhas, P.V. Patel, H.K. Pannu et al., Imaging of pelvic malignancies with in-line FDG PET-CT: case examples and common pitfalls of FDG PET, Radiographics 25 (2005), 1031-1043. (Pubitemid 41196938)
24. A. Stahl, W.A. Weber, N. Avril et al., Effect of N-butylscopolamine on intestinal uptake of fluorine-18- fluorodeoxyglucose in PET imaging of the abdomen, Nuklearmedizin 39 (2000), 241-245. (Pubitemid 32039700)
25. R.E. Bristow, R.S. Tomacruz, D.K. Armstrong et al., Survival effect of maximal cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian carcinoma during the platinum era: a meta-analysis, J Clin Oncol 20 (2002), 1248-1259. (Pubitemid 34177431)
26. C.M. Tempany, K.H. Zou, S.G. Silverman et al., Staging of advanced ovarian cancer: comparison of imaging modalities- report from the Radiological Diagnostic Oncology Group, Radiology 215 (2000), 761-767. (Pubitemid 30346013)
27. Y. Yoshida, T. Kurokawa, K. Kawahara et al., Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer, AJR Am J Roentgenol 182 (2004), 227-233. (Pubitemid 38017747)
28. K. Kitajima, K. Murakami, E. Yamasaki 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 35 (2008), 1912-1920.
29. S. Risum, C. Hogdall, A. Loft et al., Does the use of diagnostic PET/CT cause stage migration in patients with primary advanced ovarian cancer? Gynecol Oncol 116 (2011), 395-398.
30. Y. Yuan, Z.X.Gu, X.F. Tao et al., Computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer: A meta-analysis, Eur J Radiol (2011).
31. P.De Iaco,A.Musto, L.Orazi et al., FDG-PET/CTin advanced ovarian cancer staging: Value and pitfalls in detecting lesions in different abdominal and pelvic quadrants compared with laparoscopy, Eur J Radiol (2010).
32. V. De Rosa, M.L. Mangoni di Stefano, A. Brunetti et al., Computed tomography and second-look surgery in ovarian cancer patients. Correlation, actual role and limitations of CT scan, Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 16 (1995), 123-129.
33. M.C. Javitt, ACR Appropriateness Criteria on staging and follow-up of ovarian cancer, J Am Coll Radiol 4 (2007), 586-589. (Pubitemid 47369296)
34. Y. Nakamoto, T. Saga, T. Ishimori et al., Clinical value of positron emission tomography with FDG for recurrent ovarian cancer, AJR Am J Roentgenol 176 (2001), 1449-1454. (Pubitemid 32510262)
35. S. Sebastian, S.I. Lee, N.S. Horowitz et al., PET-CT vs. CT alone in ovarian cancer recurrence, Abdom Imaging 33 (2008), 112-118.
36. M.M. Thrall, J.A. DeLoia, H. Gallion et al., Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer, Gynecol Oncol 105 (2007), 17-22. (Pubitemid 46441448)
37. A.H. Iagaru, E.S. Mittra, I.R. McDougall et al., 18F-FDG PET/CT evaluation of patients with ovarian carcinoma, Nucl Med Commun 29 (2008), 1046-1051.
38. G. Mangili, M. Picchio, S. Sironi et al., Integrated PET/CT as a first-line re-staging modality in patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34 (2007), 658-666. (Pubitemid 46669366)
39. B. Simcock, D. Neesham, M. Quinn et al., The impact of PET/CT in the management of recurrent ovarian cancer, Gynecol Oncol (2006).
40. K. Kitajima, K.Murakami, E. Yamasaki et al., Performance of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer: comparison with integrated FDGPET/ non-contrast-enhanced CT and enhanced CT, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35 (2008), 1439-1448.
41. P. Bhosale, S. Peungjesada, W. Wei et al., Clinical utility of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer in the setting of normal CA-125 levels, Int J Gynecol Cancer 20 (2011), 936-944.
42. S.M. Cho, H.K. Ha, J.Y. Byun et al., Usefulness of FDG PET for assessment of early recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer, AJR Am J Roentgenol 179 (2002), 391-395. (Pubitemid 34785642)
43. S. Sironi, C.Messa, G.Mangili et al., Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings, Radiology 233 (2004), 433-440. (Pubitemid 39423802)
44. P. Gu, L.L. Pan, S.Q.Wu et al., CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis, Eur J Radiol 71 (2009), 164-174.
45. W.A. Weber, Positron emission tomography as an imaging biomarker, J Clin Oncol 24 (2006), 3282-3292. (Pubitemid 46622068)
46. N. Avril, S. Sassen, B. Schmalfeldt et al., Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18- fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patientswith advanced-stage ovarian cancer, J Clin Oncol 23 (2005), 7445-7453. (Pubitemid 46291806)
47. Y. Nishiyama, Y. Yamamoto, K. Kanenishi et al., Monitoring the neoadjuvant therapy response in gynecological cancer patients using FDG PET, Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35 (2008), 287-295.
48. B.J. Pichler, A. Kolb, T. Nagele et al., PET/MRI: paving the way for the next generation of clinical multimodality imaging applications, J NuclMed 51 (2011), 333-336.
49. B.J. Pichler, H.F. Wehrl, A. Kolb et al., Positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging: the next generation of multimodality imaging? Semin Nucl Med 38 (2008), 199-208. (Pubitemid 351466918)
50. K. Nakajo, M. Tatsumi, A. Inoue et al., Diagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/ magnetic resonance imaging fusion images of gynecological malignant tumors: comparison with positron emission tomography/computed tomography, Jpn J Radiol 28 (2011), 95-100.