Correlating metabolic activity on 18F-FDG PET/CT with histopathologic characteristics of osseous and soft-tissue sarcomas: A retrospective review of 136 patients

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 198, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1409-1416

  Rakheja, Rajan ^a   Makis, William ^b   Skamene, Sonia ^a   Nahal, Ayoub ^c   Brimo, Fadi ^c   Azoulay, Laurent ^d,e   Assayag, Jonathan ^f   Turcotte, Robert ^e   Hickeson, Marc ^a  

^a ROYAL VICTORIA HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b Brandon Regional Health Centre   (Canada)

^c MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^d MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

FDG; FDG PET CT; Mitotic count; Myxoid; Necrosis; Sarcoma

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; TUMOR MARKER;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; METABOLIC REGULATION; METASTASIS; MITOSIS RATE; MYXOSARCOMA; OSTEOSARCOMA; PREDICTION; PRIMARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFT TISSUE SARCOMA; TUMOR BIOPSY; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION; TUMOR NECROSIS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NECROSIS; NEOPLASM STAGING; OSTEOSARCOMA; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SARCOMA; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 84861586450     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7560     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2008. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, 2008. http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/2008CAFFfinalsecured. pdf
2. Shives TC. Biopsy of soft-tissue tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993; 289:32-35 (Pubitemid 23124788)
3. Brown FM, Fletcher CD. Problems in grading soft tissue sarcomas. Am J Clin Pathol 2000; 114(suppl): S82-S89
4. Oliveira AM, Nascimento AG. Grading in soft tissue tumors: principles and problems. Skeletal Radiol 2001; 30:543-559 (Pubitemid 32962594)
5. Adler LP, Blair HF, Williams RP, et al. Grading liposarcomas with PET using [18F]FDG. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1990; 14:960-962 (Pubitemid 20382295)
6. Kern KA, Brunetti A, Norton JA, et al. Metabolic imaging of human extremity musculoskeletal tumors by PET. J Nucl Med 1988; 29:181-186 (Pubitemid 18056728)
7. Folpe AL, Lyles RH, Sprouse JT, Conrad EU 3rd, Eary JF. (F-18) Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a predictor of pathologic grade and other prognostic variables in bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 2000; 6:1279-1287 (Pubitemid 30226209)
8. Hain SF, O'Doherty MJ, Bingham J, Chinyama C, Smith MA. Can FDG PET be used to successfully direct preoperative biopsy of soft tissue tumours? Nucl Med Commun 2003; 24:1139-1143 (Pubitemid 39625399)
9. Hicks RJ, Toner GC, Choong PF. Clinical applications of molecular imaging in sarcoma evaluation. Cancer Imaging 2005; 5:66-72
10. Presant CA, Russell WO, Alexander RW, Fu YS. Soft-tissue and bone sarcoma histopathology peer review: the frequency of disagreement in diagnosis and the need for second pathology opinions-the Southeastern Cancer Study Group experience. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4:1658-1661 (Pubitemid 17188934)
11. Harris M, Hartley AL, Blair V, et al. Sarcomas in north west England. I. Histopathological review. Br J Cancer 1991; 64:315-320
12. Meis-Kindblom JM, Bjerkehage B, Böhling T, et al. Morphologic review of 1000 soft tissue sarcomas from the Scandinavian Sarcoma Group (SSG) Register: the peer-review committee experience. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1999; 285:18-26 (Pubitemid 29329074)
13. Coindre JM. Grading of soft tissue sarcomas: review and update. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006; 130:1448-1453
14. Rubin BP, Fletcher CD, Inwards C, et al. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with soft tissue tumors of intermediate malignant potential, malignant soft tissue tumors, and benign/locally aggressive and malignant bone tumors. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2006; 130:1616-1629 (Pubitemid 44683789)
15. Fletcher CDM, Unni KK, Mertens F, eds. World Health Organization classification of tumours: pathology and genetics of tumours of soft tissue and bone. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2002
16. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, eds. AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer, 2009
17. Inwards CY, Unni KK. Classification and grading of bone sarcomas. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 1995; 9:545-569
18. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose. Ann Surg Oncol 1997; 4:57-63
19. Miraldi F, Adler LP, Faulhaber P. PET imaging in soft tissue sarcomas. Cancer Treat Res 1997; 91:51-64
20. Jones DN, McCowage GB, Sostman HD, et al. Monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy response of soft-tissue and musculoskeletal sarcoma using fluorine-18-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1996; 37:1438-1444 (Pubitemid 26321617)
21. van Unnik JA, Coindre JM, Contesso G, et al. Grading of soft tissue sarcomas: experience of the EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group. Eur J Cancer 1993; 29A:2089-2093 (Pubitemid 23348121)
22. Eary JF, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, et al. Quantitative [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in pretreatment and grading of sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 1998; 4:1215-1220 (Pubitemid 28213332)
23. Eary JF, Mankoff DA. Tumor metabolic rates in sarcoma using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1998; 39:250-254 (Pubitemid 28114512)
24. 18F-FDG PET for the diagnosis and grading of soft-tissue sarcoma: a metaanalysis. J Nucl Med 2003; 44:717-724
25. Sheah K, Ouellette HA, Torriani M, Nielsen GP, Kattapuram S, Bredella MA. Metastatic myxoid liposarcomas: imaging and histopathologic findings. Skeletal Radiol 2008; 37:251-258
26. Schwab JH, Healey JH. FDG-PET lacks sufficient sensitivity to detect myxoid liposarcoma spinal metastases detected by MRI. Sarcoma 2007; 2007:36,785
27. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Heymer B, et al. Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography of soft tissue tumours: is a non-invasive determination of biological activity possible? Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26:599-605 (Pubitemid 29263630)
28. Costa J, Wesley RA, Glatstein E, Rosenberg SA. The grading of soft tissue sarcomas: results of a clinicohistopathologic correlation in a series of 163 cases. Cancer 1984; 53:530-541 (Pubitemid 14182732)
29. Pisters PW, Leung DH, Woodruff J, et al. Analysis of prognostic factors in 1041 patients with localized soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14:1679-1689 (Pubitemid 26134227)
30. Trojani M, Contesso G, Coindre JM, et al. Soft-tissue sarcomas of adults: study of pathological prognostic variables and definition of a histopathological grading system. Int J Cancer 1984; 33:37-42 (Pubitemid 14223231)
31. Brown FM, Fletcher CD. Problems in grading soft tissue sarcomas. Am J Clin Pathol 2000; 114(suppl): S82-S89