The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynaecological cancers

Cancer Imaging

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 49-65

  Rockall, Andrea G ^a   Cross, Susan ^a   Flanagan, Sean ^a   Moore, Elizabeth ^a   Avril, Norbert ^a  

^a ST BARTHOLOMEW S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cervix cancer; Diagnosis; Endometrial cancer; FDG PET; FDG PET CT; Gynaecological cancers; Ovarian cancer; PET; PET CT; Staging; Treatment monitoring; Vulval cancer

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; CA 125 ANTIGEN; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE; IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIUM; MUCIN; SCOPOLAMINE BUTYL BROMIDE;

ADENOCARCINOMA; ADVANCED CANCER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER INVASION; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RELAPSE; CANCER STAGING; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DRUG MONITORING; ENDOMETRIOID CARCINOMA; ENDOMETRIUM CANCER; ENDOMETRIUM CARCINOMA; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; GLUCOSE METABOLISM; GYNECOLOGIC CANCER; GYNECOLOGIC SURGERY; HUMAN; LAPAROTOMY; LEIOMYOSARCOMA; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; LYMPHADENECTOMY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; METASTASIS; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OVARY CANCER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIMARY TUMOR; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; RECURRENT CANCER; REVIEW; SECOND LOOK SURGERY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT PLANNING; TUMOR NECROSIS; UTERINE CERVIX ADENOCARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; VULVA CANCER; VULVA CARCINOMA;

FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; GENITAL NEOPLASMS, FEMALE; HUMANS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS;

EID: 84857802648     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14707330     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1102/1470-7330.2012.0007     Document Type: Review

References (74)

1. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009; 105: 103-4. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2009. 02.012.
2. 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 480-508. doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.047787.
3. Weber WA, Avril N, Schwaiger M. Relevance of positron emission tomography (PET) in oncology. Strahlenther Onkol 1999; 175: 356-73. doi:10.1007/ s000660050022. (Pubitemid 29393147)
4. Short S, Hoskin P, Wong W. Ovulation and increased FDG uptake on PET: potential for a false-positive result. Clin Nucl Med 2005; 30: 707. doi:10.1097/01.rlu.0000178248.98702.9e. (Pubitemid 41361771)
5. Subhas N, Patel PV, Pannu HK, Jacene HA, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Imaging of pelvic malignancies with in-line FDG PET-CT: case examples and common pitfalls of FDG PET. Radiographics 2005; 25: 1031-43. doi:10.1148/rg.254045155. (Pubitemid 41196938)
6. Stahl A, Weber WA, Avril N, Schwaiger M. Effect of N-butylscopolamine on intestinal uptake of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in PET imaging of the abdomen. Nuklearmedizin 2000; 39: 241-5. (Pubitemid 32039700)
7. 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology. Nucl Med Commun 2007; 28: 589-95. doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e3281afa256.
8. Fenchel S, Grab D, Nuessle K, et al. Asymptomatic adnexal masses: correlation of FDG PET and histopathologic findings. Radiology 2002; 223: 780-8. doi:10.1148/radiol.2233001850. (Pubitemid 34547598)
9. Grab D, Flock F, Stohr I, et al. Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Gynecol Oncol 2000; 77: 454-9. doi:10.1006/gyno.2000.5768. (Pubitemid 30368567)
10. Nam EJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT, et al. Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI. Gynecol Oncol 2010; 116: 389-94. doi:10.1016/ j.ygyno.2009.10.059.
11. Rieber A, Nussle K, Stohr I, et al. Preoperative diagnosis of ovarian tumors with MR imaging: comparison with transvaginal sonography, positron emission tomography, and histologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 177: 123-9. (Pubitemid 32578064)
12. Kawahara K, Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, 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. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004; 28: 505-16. doi:10.1097/00004728- 200407000-00011.
13. Risum S, Hogdall C, Loft A, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/ CT for primary ovarian cancer-a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 105: 145-9. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.11.022. (Pubitemid 46454333)
14. 18F-FDG accumulation on PET: correlation with the menstrual cycle. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 757-63. doi:10.1007/s00259-005-1771-6.
15. 18F-FDG uptake in the ovaries and uterus of healthy female volunteers. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 549-56. doi:10.1007/ s00259-004-1703-x.
16. 18F-FDG endometrial and ovarian uptake in pre- and postmenopausal patients: assessment by PET/ CT. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 266-71.
17. Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kawahara K, et al. Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182: 227-33. (Pubitemid 38017747)
18. 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. doi:10.1007/s00259-008-0890-2.
19. De Rosa V, Mangoni di Stefano ML, Brunetti A, et al. Computed tomography and second-look surgery in ovarian cancer patients. Correlation, actual role and limitations of CT scan. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1995; 16: 123-9.
20. Gu P, Pan LL, Wu SQ, Sun L, Huang G. CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2009; 71: 164-74. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.019.
21. Nakamoto Y, Saga T, Ishimori T, et al. Clinical value of positron emission tomography with FDG for recurrent ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176: 1449-54. (Pubitemid 32510262)
22. Sebastian S, Lee SI, Horowitz NS, et al. PET-CT vs. CT alone in ovarian cancer recurrence. Abdom Imaging 2008; 33: 112-18. doi:10.1007/s00261-007-9218- 0.
23. Thrall MM, DeLoia JA, Gallion H, Avril N. Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 105: 17-22. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.10.060. (Pubitemid 46441448)
24. 18F-FDG PET/CT evaluation of patients with ovarian carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 2008; 29: 1046-51. doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e32831089cb.
25. Mangili G, Picchio M, Sironi S, 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 2007; 34: 658-66. doi:10.1007/s00259-006-0306-0. (Pubitemid 46669366)
26. Cho SM, Ha HK, Byun JY, Lee JM, Kim CJ, Nam-Koong SE. Usefulness of FDG PET for assessment of early recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179: 391-5. (Pubitemid 34785642)
27. Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings. Radiology 2004; 233: 433-40. doi:10.1148/radiol.2332031800. (Pubitemid 39423802)
28. Simcock B, Neesham D, Quinn M, Drummond E, Milner A, Hicks RJ. The impact of PET/CT in the management of recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2006; 103: 271-6. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.03.004. (Pubitemid 44374699)
29. 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. doi:10.1007/s00259-008-0776-3.
30. Weber WA. Positron emission tomography as an imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 3282-92. doi:10.1200/ JCO.2006.06.6068.
31. Avril NE, Weber WA. Monitoring response to treatment in patients utilizing PET. Radiol Clin North Am 2005; 43: 189-204. doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2004. 09.006. (Pubitemid 40326568)
32. Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, et al. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 7445-53. doi:10.1200/ JCO.2005.06.965.
33. Horowitz NS, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, et al. Prospective evaluation of FDG-PET for detecting pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastasis in uterine corpus cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2004; 95: 546-51. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.08.009. (Pubitemid 39592519)
34. Suzuki R, Miyagi E, Takahashi N, et al. Validity of positron emission tomography using fluoro-2-deoxyglucose for the preoperative evaluation of endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007; 17: 890-6. doi:10.1111/j.1525- 1438.2007.00859.x. (Pubitemid 47063323)
35. 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting pelvic and paraaortic lymph node metastasis in patients with endometrial cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008; 190: 1652-8. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.3372.
36. Nayot D, Kwon JS, Carey MS, Driedger A. Does preoperative positron emission tomography with computed tomography predict nodal status in endometrial cancer? A pilot study. Curr Oncol 2008; 15: 123-5.
37. Picchio M, Mangili G, Samanes Gajate AM, et al. High-grade endometrial cancer: value of [(18)F]FDG PET/CT in preoperative staging. Nucl Med Commun 2010; 31: 506-12.
38. Signorelli M, Guerra L, Buda A, et al. Role of the integrated FDG PET/CT in the surgical management of patients with high risk clinical early stage endometrial cancer: detection of pelvic nodal metastases. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 115: 231-5. doi:10.1016/ j.ygyno.2009.07.020.
39. 18F-FDG PET correlates with histological grade in endometrial cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2010; 20: 110-15. doi:10.1111/IGC. 0b013e3181c3a288.
40. Chung HH, Kang WJ, Kim JW, et al. The clinical impact of [(18)F]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. doi:10.1007/ s00259-007-0687-8.
41. 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. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1438.2008.01197.x.
42. Kitajima K, Suzuki K, Nakamoto Y, et al. 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. doi:10.1007/s00259-010-1440-2.
43. Sugawara Y, Eisbruch A, Kosuda S, Recker BE, Kison PV, Wahl RL. Evaluation of FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 1125-31. (Pubitemid 29315502)
44. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 3745-3749. (Pubitemid 32844787)
45. Belhocine T, Thille A, Fridman V, et al. Contribution of whole-body (18)FDG PET imaging in the management of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2002; 87: 90-97. doi:10.1006/gyno.2002.6769. (Pubitemid 36027107)
46. Narayan K, Hicks RJ, Jobling T, Bernshaw D, McKenzie AF. A comparison of MRI and PET scanning in surgically staged locoregionally advanced cervical cancer: potential impact on treatment. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2001; 11: 263-71. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1438.2001.011004263.x. (Pubitemid 32751393)
47. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D, et al. Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 2001; 218: 776-82. (Pubitemid 32172564)
48. Xue F, Lin LL, Dehdashti F, Miller TR, Siegel BA, Grigsby PW. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in primary cervical cancer as an indicator of prognosis after radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol 2006; 101: 147-51. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.10.005.
49. Miller TR, Grigsby PW. Measurement of tumor volume by PET to evaluate prognosis in patients with advanced cervical cancer treated by radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002; 53: 353-9. (Pubitemid 34522101)
50. Yang WT, Lam WW, Yu MY, Cheung TH, Metreweli C. Comparison of dynamic helical CT and dynamic MR imaging in the evaluation of pelvic lymph nodes in cervical carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175: 759-66.
51. Chou HH, Chang HP, Lai CH, et al. 18)F-FDG PET in stage IB/IIB cervical adenocarcinoma/adenosquamous carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging37: 728-35. doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1336-1.
52. Magne N, Chargari C, Vicenzi L, et al. New trends in the evaluation and treatment of cervix cancer: the role of FDGPET. Cancer Treat Rev 2008; 34: 671-81. doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2008.08.003.
53. Tran BN, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, Siegel BA. Occult supraclavicular lymph node metastasis identified by FDG-PET in patients with carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 90: 572-6. doi:10.1016/S0090-8258(03)00402-5.
54. Singh AK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ, Siegel BA. FDG-PET lymph node staging and survival of patients with FIGO stage IIIb cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 56: 489-93. doi:10.1016/S0360-3016(02)04521- 2. (Pubitemid 36542908)
55. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. Pelvic lymph node F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose uptake as a prognostic biomarker in newly diagnosed patients with locally advanced cervical cancer. Cancer 2010; 116: 1469-75. doi:10.1002/cncr.24972.
56. Cervical cancer 1.2011. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology (NCCN Guidelines™) http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/f- guidelines.asp#site (accessed 30 January 2012; login required).
57. MacManus M, Nestle U, Rosenzweig KE, et al. Use of PET and PET/CT for radiation therapy planning: IAEA expert report 2006-2007. Radiother Oncol 2009; 91: 85-94. doi:10.1016/ j.radonc.2008.11.008.
58. Taylor A, Rockall AG, Reznek RH, Powell ME. Mapping pelvic lymph nodes: guidelines for delineation in intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005; 63: 1604-12. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.05.062. (Pubitemid 41628062)
59. Grigsby PW. PET/CT imaging to guide cervical cancer therapy. Future Oncol 2009; 5: 953-958. doi:10.2217/fon.09.70.
60. Babar S, Rockall A, Goode A, Shepherd J, Reznek R. Magnetic resonance imaging appearances of recurrent cervical carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2007; 17: 637-45. doi:10.1111/j.1525- 1438.2007.00849.x.
61. Ryu SY, Kim MH, Choi SC, Choi CW, Lee KH. Detection of early recurrence with 18F-FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 347-52.
62. 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. doi:10.1016/ j.ygyno.2006.09.009.
63. Sironi S, Picchio M, Landoni C, et al. Post-therapy surveillance of patients with uterine cancers: value of integrated FDG PET/CT in the detection of recurrence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007; 34: 472-9. doi:10.1007/s00259- 006-0251-y. (Pubitemid 46426981)
64. Mittra E, El-Maghraby T, Rodriguez CA, et al. Efficacy of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of patients with recurrent cervical carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36: 1952-9. doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1206-x.
65. Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Domeki Y, Kaji Y, Sugimura K. Performance of FDG-PET/CT for diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer. Eur Radiol 2008; 18: 2040-7. doi:10.1007/s00330-008-0979-9.
66. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Management of cervical cancer. 2008http://www.sign.ac.uk/guidelines/fulltext/99/ index.html (accessed 30 January 2012).
67. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, et al. [(18)F]FDG PET monitoring of tumour response to chemotherapy: does [(18)F]FDG uptake correlate with the viable tumour cell fraction? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30: 682-8. doi:10.1007/s00259-003-1120-6. (Pubitemid 36612950)
68. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in carcinoma of the cervix: response and outcome. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 2167-71. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.09.035.
69. Grigsby PW. The role of FDG-PET/CT imaging after radiation therapy. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 107: S27-9. doi:10.1016/ j.ygyno.2007.07.034.
70. Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma. JAMA 2007; 298: 2289-95. doi:10.1001/jama.298.19.2289. (Pubitemid 350146219)
71. Imperiale A, Heymann S, Claria M, et al. F-18 FDG PET-CT in a rare case of Bartholin's gland undifferentiated carcinoma managed with chemoradiation and interstitial brachytherapy. Clin Nucl Med 2007; 32: 498-500. doi:10.1097/RLU.0b013e318053783d. (Pubitemid 46791483)
72. Husain A, Akhurst T, Larson S, Alektiar K, Barakat RR, Chi DS. A prospective study of the accuracy of 18Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18FDG PET) in identifying sites of metastasis prior to pelvic exenteration. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 106: 177-80. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.03.018. (Pubitemid 46898590)
73. De Hullu JA, Pruim J, Que TH, et al. Noninvasive detection of inguinofemoral lymph node metastases in squamous cell cancer of the vulva by L. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1999; 9: 141-6. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1438.1999.09909.x.
74. 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 patients with uterine corpus cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2008; 108: 486-92. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.11.044.