Advances in oncologic imaging: Update on 5 common cancers

CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Volumn 62, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 364-393

  Akin, Oguz ^a   Brennan, Sandra B ^a   Dershaw, D David ^a   Ginsberg, Michelle S ^a   Gollub, Marc J ^a   Schöder, Heiko ^a   Panicek, David M ^a   Hricak, Hedvig ^a  

^a WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

breast neoplasms; colon and rectum neoplasms; lung neoplasms; non Hodgkin lymphoma; prostate neoplasms

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; BLEOMYCIN; CARBOPLATIN; CHOLINE; CREATINE; CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DACARBAZINE; DOXORUBICIN; ETOPOSIDE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GADOBENATE DIMEGLUMINE; GADOXETIC ACID; GEMCITABINE; IFOSFAMIDE; NAVELBINE; PREDNISONE; PROCARBAZINE; PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROTEIN TYROSINE KINASE INHIBITOR; RITUXIMAB; VINBLASTINE; VINCRISTINE;

ADJUVANT THERAPY; AUTOLOGOUS STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION; BARIUM ENEMA; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SURGERY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COLONOSCOPY; COLORECTAL CANCER; COLORECTAL SURGERY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC COLONOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; EVENT FREE SURVIVAL; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FOLLOW UP; GLEASON SCORE; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; IMMUNOCHEMISTRY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LARGE CELL LYMPHOMA; LUNG CANCER; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LUNG RESECTION; LUNG SMALL CELL CANCER; LYMPHOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; OCCULT BLOOD; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGMOIDOSCOPY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; TREATMENT PLANNING; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; BIOPSY; CATHETER ABLATION; COLONOSCOPY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MASS SCREENING; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; NEOPLASM STAGING; NEOPLASMS; SIGMOIDOSCOPY;

EID: 84869403674     PISSN: 00079235     EISSN: 15424863     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3322/caac.21156     Document Type: Review

References (237)

1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A,. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012; 62: 10-29.
2. Evans WP,. Breast cancer screening: Successes and challenges. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012; 62: 5-9.
3. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory Group. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007; 57: 75-89.
4. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, Bougatsos C, Chan BK, Humphrey L,; US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: 727-737, W237-W742.
5. Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010; 7: 18-27.
6. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 8469-8476.
7. Lehman CD, Isaacs C, Schnall MD, et al. Cancer yield of mammography, MR, and US in high-risk women: prospective multi-institution breast cancer screening study. Radiology. 2007; 244: 381-388.
8. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA. 2004; 292: 1317-1325.
9. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. ACRIN 6666 Investigators. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008; 299: 2151-2163.
10. Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, et al. ACRIN 6666 Investigators. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA. 2012; 307: 1394-1404.
11. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD,. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998; 171: 35-40.
12. Liberman L, Menell JH,. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Radiol Clin North Am. 2002; 40: 409-430.
13. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2007; 370: 485-492.
14. Menell JH, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Brogi E, Liberman L,. Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J. 2005; 11: 382-390.
15. Bassett L, Winchester DP, Caplan RB, et al. Stereotactic core-needle biopsy of the breast: a report of the Joint Task Force of the American College of Radiology, American College of Surgeons, and College of American Pathologists. CA Cancer J Clin. 1997; 47: 171-190.
16. Liberman L, Holland AE, Marjan D, et al. Underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 188: 684-690.
17. Liberman L, Sama M, Susnik B, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ at percutaneous breast biopsy: surgical biopsy findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999; 173: 291-299.
18. Berg JC, Visscher DW, Vierkant RA, et al. Breast cancer risk in women with radial scars in benign breast biopsies. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 108: 167-174.
19. Kim MJ, Kim SI, Youk JH, et al. The diagnosis of non-malignant papillary lesions of the breast: comparison of ultrasound-guided automated gun biopsy and vacuum-assisted removal. Clin Radiol. 2011; 66: 530-535.
20. Brennan ME, Turner RM, Ciatto S, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ at core-needle biopsy: meta-analysis of underestimation and predictors of invasive breast cancer. Radiology. 2011; 260: 119-128.
21. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 3248-3258.
22. Boetes C, Strijk SP, Holland R, Barentsz JO, Van Der Sluis RF, Ruijs JH,. False-negative MR imaging of malignant breast tumors. Eur Radiol. 1997; 7: 1231-1234.
23. Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Drotman MB, et al. Evaluation of pectoralis major muscle in patients with posterior breast tumors on breast MR images: early experience. Radiology. 2000; 214: 67-72.
24. Brennan ME, Houssami N, Lord S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging screening of the contralateral breast in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of incremental cancer detection and impact on surgical management. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 5640-5649.
25. Lehman CD, Blume JD, Thickman D, et al. Added cancer yield of MRI in screening the contralateral breast of women recently diagnosed with breast cancer: results from the International Breast Magnetic Resonance Consortium (IBMC) trial. J Surg Oncol. 2005; 92: 9-15.
26. Yuan Y, Chen XS, Liu SY, Shen KW,. Accuracy of MRI in prediction of pathologic complete remission in breast cancer after preoperative therapy: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 195: 260-268.
27. Dershaw DD,. Mammography in patients with breast cancer treated by breast conservation (lumpectomy with or without radiation). AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995; 164: 309-316.
28. Brennan S, Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Morris E,. Breast MRI screening of women with a personal history of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 195: 510-516.
29. Gur D, Abrams GS, Chough DM, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009; 193: 586-591.
30. Hakim CM, Chough DM, Ganott MA, Sumkin JH, Zuley ML, Gur D,. Digital breast tomosynthesis in the diagnostic environment: a subjective side-by-side review. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 195: W172-W176.
31. Diekmann F, Freyer M, Diekmann S, et al. Evaluation of contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Eur J Radiol. 2011; 78: 112-121.
32. Dromain C, Thibault F, Muller S, et al. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical results. Eur Radiol. 2011; 21: 565-574.
33. Bartella L, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, et al. Proton MR spectroscopy with choline peak as malignancy marker improves positive predictive value for breast cancer diagnosis: preliminary study. Radiology. 2006; 239: 686-692.
34. Jagannathan NR, Kumar M, Seenu V, et al. Evaluation of total choline from in-vivo volume localized proton MR spectroscopy and its response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2001; 84: 1016-1022.
35. Meisamy S, Bolan PJ, Baker EH, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy of locally advanced breast cancer: predicting response with in vivo (1)H MR spectroscopy-a pilot study at 4 T. Radiology. 2004; 233: 424-431.
36. Guo Y, Cai YQ, Cai ZL, et al. Differentiation of clinically benign and malignant breast lesions using diffusion-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2002; 16: 172-178.
37. Partridge SC, Mullins CD, Kurland BF, et al. Apparent diffusion coefficient values for discriminating benign and malignant breast MRI lesions: effects of lesion type and size. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 194: 1664-1673.
38. Ophir J, Cespedes I, Ponnekanti H, Yazdi Y, Li X,. Elastography: a quantitative method for imaging the elasticity of biological tissues. Ultrason Imaging. 1991; 13: 111-134.
39. Cho N, Jang M, Lyou CY, Park JS, Choi HY, Moon WK,. Distinguishing benign from malignant masses at breast US: combined US elastography and color doppler US-influence on radiologist accuracy. Radiology. 2012; 262: 80-90.
40. Pritchard KI, Julian JA, Holloway CM, et al. Prospective study of 2-[(1)(8)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the assessment of regional nodal spread of disease in patients with breast cancer: an Ontario clinical oncology group study. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30: 1274-1279.
41. Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Espie M, et al. The yield of 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with clinical stage IIA, IIB, or IIIA breast cancer: a prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2011; 52: 1526-1534.
42. Schwarz-Dose J, Untch M, Tiling R, et al. Monitoring primary systemic therapy of large and locally advanced breast cancer by using sequential positron emission tomography imaging with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 535-541.
43. Tateishi U, Miyake M, Nagaoka T, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: prediction of pathologic response with PET/CT and dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging-prospective assessment. Radiology. 2012; 263: 53-63.
44. Mankoff DA, Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, et al. Changes in blood flow and metabolism in locally advanced breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Nucl Med. 2003; 44: 1806-1814.
45. Dunnwald LK, Gralow JR, Ellis GK, et al. Tumor metabolism and blood flow changes by positron emission tomography: relation to survival in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008; 26: 4449-4457.
46. Morris PG, Ulaner GA, Eaton A, et al. Standardized uptake value by positron emission tomography/computed tomography as a prognostic variable in metastatic breast cancer. Cancer. 2012; doi:10.1002/cncr.27579.
47. Berg WA, Weinberg IN, Narayanan D, et al. High-resolution fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with compression ("positron emission mammography") is highly accurate in depicting primary breast cancer. Breast J. 2006; 12: 309-323.
48. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM,. GLOBOCAN 2008 version 1.2, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No. 10. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2010. globocan. iarc.fr/. Accessed February 7, 2012.
49. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2011. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2011.
50. Godoy MC, Naidich DP,. Subsolid pulmonary nodules and the spectrum of peripheral adenocarcinomas of the lung: recommended interim guidelines for assessment and management. Radiology. 2009; 253: 606-622.
51. Park CM, Goo JM, Lee HJ, Lee CH, Chun EJ, Im JG,. Nodular ground-glass opacity at thin-section CT: histologic correlation and evaluation of change at follow-up. Radiographics. 2007; 27: 391-408.
52. Aoki T, Nakata H, Watanabe H, et al. Evolution of peripheral lung adenocarcinomas: CT findings correlated with histology and tumor doubling time. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000; 174: 763-768.
53. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, editors. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2008, National Cancer Institute: Bethesda, MD. seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975- 2008/, based on November 2010 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER Web site, 2011. Accessed February 7, 2012.
54. Rosado-de-Christenson ML, Templeton PA, Moran CA,. Bronchogenic carcinoma: radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 1994; 14: 429-446; quiz 447-428.
55. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011; 365: 395-409.
56. Aberle DR, Berg CD, Black WC, et al. The National Lung Screening Trial: overview and study design. Radiology. 2011; 258: 243-253.
57. Goulart BH, Bensink ME, Mummy DG, Ramsey SD,. Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography: costs, national expenditures, and cost-effectiveness. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012; 10: 267-275.
58. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: non-small cell lung cancer. Version 3.2012. nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/f-guidelines.asp. Accessed September 6, 2012.
59. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B, von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC,. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003; 348: 2500-2507.
60. Ravenel JG, Mohammed TL, Movsas B, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria(R) noninvasive clinical staging of bronchogenic carcinoma. J Thorac Imaging. 2010; 25: W107-W111.
61. Ginsberg MS, Grewal RK, Heelan RT,. Lung cancer. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007; 45: 21-43.
62. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Non-Small cell lung cancer. Version 3.2012 nccn.org. Accessed April 27, 2012.
63. Pöttgen C, Levegrün S, Theegarten D, et al. Value of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer for prediction of pathologic response and times to relapse after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2006; 12: 97-106.
64. Weber WA, Petersen V, Schmidt B, et al. Positron emission tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer: prediction of response to chemotherapy by quantitative assessment of glucose use. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 2651-2657.
65. Benz MR, Herrmann K, Walter F, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT for monitoring treatment responses to the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor erlotinib. J Nucl Med. 2011; 52: 1684-1689.
66. Mileshkin L, Hicks RJ, Hughes BG, et al. Changes in 18F- fluorodeoxyglucose and 18F-fluorodeoxythymidine positron emission tomography imaging in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib. Clin Cancer Res. 2011; 17: 3304-3315.
67. Pua BB, Thornton RH, Solomon SB,. Radiofrequency ablation: treatment of primary lung cancer. Semin Roentgenol. 2011; 46: 224-229.
68. Bojarski JD, Dupuy DE, Mayo-Smith WW,. CT imaging findings of pulmonary neoplasms after treatment with radiofrequency ablation: results in 32 tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 185: 466-471.
69. Kang S, Luo R, Liao W, Wu H, Zhang X, Meng Y,. Single group study to evaluate the feasibility and complications of radiofrequency ablation and usefulness of post treatment position emission tomography in lung tumours. World J Surg Oncol. 2004; 2: 30.
70. Singnurkar A, Solomon SB, Gönen M, Larson SM, Schöder H,. 18F-FDG PET/CT for the prediction and detection of local recurrence after radiofrequency ablation of malignant lung lesions. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51: 1833-1840.
71. Smith S, Gillams A,. Imaging appearances following thermal ablation. Clin Radiol. 2008; 63: 1-11.
72. Shariat SF, Kattan MW, Vickers AJ, Karakiewicz PI, Scardino PT,. Critical review of prostate cancer predictive tools. Future Oncol. 2009; 5: 1555-1584.
73. Ahmed HU, Akin O, Coleman JA, et al. Transatlantic Consensus Group on Active Surveillance and Focal Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Transatlantic Consensus Group on active surveillance and focal therapy for prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012; 109: 1636-1647.
74. Haider MA, van der Kwast TH, Tanguay J, et al. Combined T2-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI for localization of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 189: 323-328.
75. Kim CK, Park BK, Lee HM, Kwon GY,. Value of diffusion-weighted imaging for the prediction of prostate cancer location at 3T using a phased-array coil: preliminary results. Invest Radiol. 2007; 42: 842-847.
76. Miao H, Fukatsu H, Ishigaki T,. Prostate cancer detection with 3-T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted and T2-weighted imaging. Eur J Radiol. 2007; 61: 297-302.
77. Oto A, Yang C, Kayhan A, et al. Diffusion-weighted and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer: correlation of quantitative MR parameters with Gleason score and tumor angiogenesis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197: 1382-1390.
78. Turkbey B, Shah VP, Pang Y, et al. Is apparent diffusion coefficient associated with clinical risk scores for prostate cancers that are visible on 3-T MR images? Radiology. 2011; 258: 488-495.
79. Vargas HA, Akin O, Franiel T, et al. Diffusion-weighted endorectal MR imaging at 3 T for prostate cancer: tumor detection and assessment of aggressiveness. Radiology. 2011; 259: 775-784.
80. Tofts PS, Brix G, Buckley DL, et al. Estimating kinetic parameters from dynamic contrast-enhanced T(1)-weighted MRI of a diffusable tracer: standardized quantities and symbols. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999; 10: 223-232.
81. Akin O, Gultekin DH, Vargas HA, et al. Incremental value of diffusion weighted and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in the detection of locally recurrent prostate cancer after radiation treatment: preliminary results. Eur Radiol. 2011; 21: 1970-1978.
82. Alonzi R, Padhani AR, Allen C,. Dynamic contrast enhanced MRI in prostate cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2007; 63: 335-350.
83. Bloch BN, Furman-Haran E, Helbich TH, et al. Prostate cancer: accurate determination of extracapsular extension with high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR imaging-initial results. Radiology. 2007; 245: 176-185.
84. Futterer JJ, Engelbrecht MR, Huisman HJ, et al. Staging prostate cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced endorectal MR imaging prior to radical prostatectomy: experienced versus less experienced readers. Radiology. 2005; 237: 541-549.
85. Ocak I, Bernardo M, Metzger G, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI of prostate cancer at 3 T: a study of pharmacokinetic parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007; 189: 849.
86. Sciarra A, Panebianco V, Ciccariello M, et al. Value of magnetic resonance spectroscopy imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging for detecting prostate cancer foci in men with prior negative biopsy. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16: 1875-1883.
87. Bonekamp D, Jacobs MA, El-Khouli R, Stoianovici D, Macura KJ,. Advancements in MR imaging of the prostate: from diagnosis to interventions. Radiographics. 2011; 31: 677-703.
88. Mazaheri Y, Shukla-Dave A, Muellner A, Hricak H,. MRI of the prostate: clinical relevance and emerging applications. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011; 33: 258-274.
89. Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Moskowitz C, et al. Detection of prostate cancer with MR spectroscopic imaging: an expanded paradigm incorporating polyamines. Radiology. 2007; 245: 499-506.
90. Weinreb JC, Blume JD, Coakley FV, et al. Prostate cancer: sextant localization at MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging before prostatectomy-results of ACRIN prospective multi-institutional clinicopathologic study. Radiology. 2009; 251: 122-133.
91. Shukla-Dave A, Hricak H, Akin O, et al. Preoperative nomograms incorporating magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy for prediction of insignificant prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012; 109: 1315-1322.
92. Zakian KL, Sircar K, Hricak H, et al. Correlation of proton MR spectroscopic imaging with gleason score based on step-section pathologic analysis after radical prostatectomy. Radiology. 2005; 234: 804-814.
93. Bouchelouche K, Turkbey B, Choyke P, Capala J,. Imaging prostate cancer: an update on positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Curr Urol Rep. 2010; 11: 180-190.
94. Fox JJ, Morris MJ, Larson SM, Schöder H, Scher HI,. Developing imaging strategies for castration resistant prostate cancer. Acta Oncol. 2011; 50 (suppl 1): 39-48.
95. Jadvar H,. Molecular imaging of prostate cancer with 18F- fluorodeoxyglucose PET. Nat Rev Urol. 2009; 6: 317-323.
96. Jadvar H,. Prostate cancer: PET with 18F-FDG, 18F- or 11C-acetate, and 18F- or 11C-choline. J Nucl Med. 2011; 52: 81-89.
97. Meirelles GS, Schöder H, Ravizzini GC, et al. Prognostic value of baseline [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and 99mTc-MDP bone scan in progressing metastatic prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2010; 16: 6093-6099.
98. Murphy RC, Kawashima A, Peller PJ,. The utility of 11C-choline PET/CT for imaging prostate cancer: a pictorial guide. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 196: 1390-1398.
99. Castellucci P, Fuccio C, Rubello D, et al. Is there a role for 11C-choline PET/CT in the early detection of metastatic disease in surgically treated prostate cancer patients with a mild PSA increase < 1.5 ng/ml? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011; 38: 55-63.
100. Schiavina R, Scattoni V, Castellucci P, et al. 11C-choline positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for preoperative lymph-node staging in intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer: comparison with clinical staging nomograms. Eur Urol. 2008; 54: 392-401.
101. Jana S, Blaufox MD,. Nuclear medicine studies of the prostate, testes, and bladder. Semin Nucl Med. 2006; 36: 51-72.
102. Soloviev D, Fini A, Chierichetti F, Al-Nahhas A, Rubello D,. PET imaging with 11C-acetate in prostate cancer: a biochemical, radiochemical and clinical perspective. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008; 35: 942-949.
103. Vees H, Buchegger F, Albrecht S, et al. 18F-choline and/or 11C-acetate positron emission tomography: detection of residual or progressive subclinical disease at very low prostate-specific antigen values (< 1 ng/mL) after radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2007; 99: 1415-1420.
104. Dehdashti F, Picus J, Michalski JM, et al. Positron tomographic assessment of androgen receptors in prostatic carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005; 32: 344-350.
105. Larson SM, Morris M, Gunther I, et al. Tumor localization of 16beta-18F-fluoro-5alpha-dihydrotestosterone versus 18F-FDG in patients with progressive, metastatic prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2004; 45: 366-373.
106. Schuster DM, Votaw JR, Nieh PT, et al. Initial experience with the radiotracer anti-1-amino-3-18F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid with PET/CT in prostate carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48: 56-63.
107. Tõth G, Lengyel Z, Balkay L, Salah MA, Trõn L, Tõth C,. Detection of prostate cancer with 11C-methionine positron emission tomography. J Urol. 2005; 173: 66-69.
108. Cirillo S, Petracchini M, Della Monica P, et al. Value of endorectal MRI and MRS in patients with elevated prostate-specific antigen levels and previous negative biopsies to localize peripheral zone tumours. Clin Radiol. 2008; 63: 871-879.
109. Kitajima K, Kaji Y, Fukabori Y, Yoshida K, Suganuma N, Sugimura K,. Prostate cancer detection with 3 T MRI: comparison of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010; 31: 625-631.
110. Villeirs GM, De Meerleer GO, De Visschere PJ, Fonteyne VH, Verbaeys AC, Oosterlinck W,. Combined magnetic resonance imaging and spectroscopy in the assessment of high grade prostate carcinoma in patients with elevated PSA: a single-institution experience of 356 patients. Eur J Radiol. 2011; 77: 340-345.
111. Pinto PA, Chung PH, Rastinehad AR, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging/ultrasound fusion guided prostate biopsy improves cancer detection following transrectal ultrasound biopsy and correlates with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. J Urol. 2011; 186: 1281-1285.
112. Wang L, Hricak H, Kattan MW, Chen HN, Scardino PT, Kuroiwa K,. Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology. 2006; 238: 597-603.
113. Cooperberg MR, Lubeck DP, Meng MV, Mehta SS, Carroll PR,. The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and primary management. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 2141-2149.
114. Harnden P, Naylor B, Shelley MD, Clements H, Coles B, Mason MD,. The clinical management of patients with a small volume of prostatic cancer on biopsy: what are the risks of progression? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer. 2008; 112: 971-981.
115. Cooperberg MR, Carroll PR, Klotz L,. Active surveillance for prostate cancer: progress and promise. J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 3669-3676.
116. Keegan KA, Dall'era MA, Durbin-Johnson B, Evans CP,. Active surveillance for prostate cancer compared with immediate treatment: An economic analysis. Cancer. 2011; doi:10.1002/cncr.26688.
117. Lindner U, Lawrentschuk N, Schatloff O, Trachtenberg J, Lindner A,. Evolution from active surveillance to focal therapy in the management of prostate cancer. Future Oncol. 2011; 7: 775-787.
118. Ahmed HU, Pendse D, Illing R, Allen C, van der Meulen JH, Emberton M,. Will focal therapy become a standard of care for men with localized prostate cancer? Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2007; 4: 632-642.
119. Rosenkrantz AB, Scionti SM, Mendrinos S, Taneja SS,. Role of MRI in minimally invasive focal ablative therapy for prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197: W90-W96.
120. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2012. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society; 2012.
121. Nusko G, Mansmann U, Partzsch U, et al. Invasive carcinoma in colorectal adenomas: multivariate analysis of patient and adenoma characteristics. Endoscopy. 1997; 29: 626-631.
122. McHugh M, Osei-Anto A, Klabunde CN, Galen BA,. Adoption of CT colonography by US hospitals. J Am Coll Radiol. 2011; 8: 169-174.
123. House MG, Ito H, Gönen M, et al. Survival after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: trends in outcomes for 1,600 patients during two decades at a single institution. J Am Coll Surg. 2010; 210: 744-755.
124. Choi JY, Choi JS, Kim MJ, et al. Detection of hepatic hypovascular metastases: 3D gradient echo MRI using a hepatobiliary contrast agent. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010; 31: 571-578.
125. MERCURY study group. Diagnostic accuracy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in predicting curative resection of rectal cancer: prospective observational study. BMJ. 2006; 333: 779.
126. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Cancer screening-United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012; 61: 41-45.
127. Pignone M, Saha S, Hoerger T, Mandelblatt J,. Cost-effectiveness analyses of colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002; 137: 96-104.
128. Guittet L, Bouvier V, Mariotte N, et al. Comparison of a guaiac based and an immunochemical faecal occult blood test in screening for colorectal cancer in a general average risk population. Gut. 2007; 56: 210-214.
129. Smith A, Young GP, Cole SR, Bampton P,. Comparison of a brush-sampling fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin with a sensitive guaiac-based fecal occult blood test in detection of colorectal neoplasia. Cancer. 2006; 107: 2152-2159.
130. Itzkowitz S, Brand R, Jandorf L, et al. A simplified, noninvasive stool DNA test for colorectal cancer detection. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008; 103: 2862-2870.
131. Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG, et al. A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy. National Polyp Study Work Group. N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 1766-1772.
132. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Rex DK,. Performance improvements of imaging-based screening tests. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2010; 24: 493-507.
133. Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Meiners RJ, et al. Colorectal and extracolonic cancers detected at screening CT colonography in 10,286 asymptomatic adults. Radiology. 2010; 255: 83-88.
134. Hassan C, Pickhardt PJ, Laghi A, et al. Computed tomographic colonography to screen for colorectal cancer, extracolonic cancer, and aortic aneurysm: model simulation with cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Intern Med. 2008; 168: 696-705.
135. Kim DH, Pickhardt PJ, Hanson ME, Hinshaw JL,. CT colonography: performance and program outcome measures in an older screening population. Radiology. 2010; 254: 493-500.
136. Toma J, Paszat LF, Gunraj N, Rabeneck L,. Rates of new or missed colorectal cancer after barium enema and their risk factors: a population-based study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008; 103: 3142-3148.
137. Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R,. Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection-systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology. 2011; 259: 393-405.
138. Nelson H, Petrelli N, Carlin A, et al. National Cancer Institute Expert Panel. Guidelines 2000 for colon and rectal cancer surgery. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001; 93: 583-596.
139. Filippone A, Ambrosini R, Fuschi M, Marinelli T, Genovesi D, Bonomo L,. Preoperative T and N staging of colorectal cancer: accuracy of contrast-enhanced multi-detector row CT colonography-initial experience. Radiology. 2004; 231: 83-90.
140. Lawrence EM, Pickhardt PJ, Kim DH, Robbins JB,. Colorectal polyps: stand-alone performance of computer-aided detection in a large asymptomatic screening population. Radiology. 2010; 256: 791-798.
141. Kuehle CA, Langhorst J, Ladd SC, et al. Magnetic resonance colonography without bowel cleansing: a prospective cross sectional study in a screening population. Gut. 2007; 56: 1079-1085.
142. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Colon cancer. Version 3. 2012. nccn.org/professionals/ physician-gls/f-guidelines.asp#site. Accessed April 23, 2012.
143. Khalil HI, Patterson SA, Panicek DM,. Hepatic lesions deemed too small to characterize at CT: prevalence and importance in women with breast cancer. Radiology. 2005; 235: 872-878.
144. Goodwin MD, Dobson JE, Sirlin CB, Lim BG, Stella DL,. Diagnostic challenges and pitfalls in MR imaging with hepatocyte-specific contrast agents. Radiographics. 2011; 31: 1547-1568.
145. Kong G, Jackson C, Koh DM, et al. The use of 18F-FDG PET/CT in colorectal liver metastases-comparison with CT and liver MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008; 35: 1323-1329.
146. Correas JM, Low G, Needleman L, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound in the detection of liver metastases: a prospective multi-centre dose testing study using a perfluorobutane microbubble contrast agent (NC100100). Eur Radiol. 2011; 21: 1739-1746.
147. Phang PT, Gollub MJ, Loh BD, et al. Accuracy of endorectal ultrasound for measurement of the closest predicted radial mesorectal margin for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012; 55: 59-64.
148. Lahaye MJ, Engelen SM, Nelemans PJ, et al. Imaging for predicting the risk factors-the circumferential resection margin and nodal disease-of local recurrence in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2005; 26: 259-268.
149. Lambregts DM, Beets GL, Maas M, et al. Accuracy of gadofosveset-enhanced MRI for nodal staging and restaging in rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2011; 253: 539-545.
150. Forner A, Ayuso C, Varela M, et al. Evaluation of tumor response after locoregional therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma: are response evaluation criteria in solid tumors reliable? Cancer. 2009; 115: 616-623.
151. Floriani I, Torri V, Rulli E, et al. Performance of imaging modalities in diagnosis of liver metastases from colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010; 31: 19-31.
152. Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, et al. EASL Panel of Experts on HCC. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver. J Hepatol. 2001; 35: 421-430.
153. Kuehl H, Antoch G, Stergar H, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET, PET/CT and MRI for follow-up of colorectal liver metastases treated with radiofrequency ablation: initial results. Eur J Radiol. 2008; 67: 362-371.
154. Maretto I, Pomerri F, Pucciarelli S, et al. The potential of restaging in the prediction of pathologic response after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007; 14: 455-461.
155. Suppiah A, Maslekar S, Alabi A, Hartley JE, Monson JR,. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery in early rectal cancer: time for a trial? Colorectal Dis. 2008; 10: 314-327;.
156. Mehta VK, Cho C, Ford JM, et al. Phase II trial of preoperative 3D conformal radiotherapy, protracted venous infusion 5-fluorouracil, and weekly CPT-11, followed by surgery for ultrasound-staged T3 rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003; 55: 132-137.
157. Kalff V, Ware R, Heriot A, Chao M, Drummond E, Hicks RJ,. Radiation changes do not interfere with postchemoradiation restaging of patients with rectal cancer by FDG PET/CT before curative surgical therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009; 74: 60-66.
158. Barbaro B, Fiorucci C, Tebala C, et al. Locally advanced rectal cancer: MR imaging in prediction of response after preoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Radiology. 2009; 250: 730-739.
159. Yeo SG, Kim DY, Park JW, et al. Tumor volume reduction rate after preoperative chemoradiotherapy as a prognostic factor in locally advanced rectal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 82: e193-e199.
160. Kim SH, Lee JY, Lee JM, Han JK, Choi BI,. Apparent diffusion coefficient for evaluating tumour response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Eur Radiol. 2011; 21: 987-995.
161. Gollub MJ, Gultekin DH, Akin O, et al. Dynamic contrast enhanced-MRI for the detection of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22: 821-831.
162. Park IJ, Kim HC, Yu CS, et al. Efficacy of PET/CT in the accurate evaluation of primary colorectal carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006; 32: 941-947.
163. Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd JE, et al. A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2000; 41: 1177-1189.
164. Meta J, Seltzer M, Schiepers C, et al. Impact of 18F-FDG PET on managing patients with colorectal cancer: the referring physician's perspective. J Nucl Med. 2001; 42: 586-590.
165. Scott AM, Gunawardana DH, Kelley B, et al. PET changes management and improves prognostic stratification in patients with recurrent colorectal cancer: results of a multicenter prospective study. J Nucl Med. 2008; 49: 1451-1457.
166. Lin M, Wong K, Ng WL, Shon IH, Morgan M,. Positron emission tomography and colorectal cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2011; 77: 30-47.
167. Dietz DW, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW, et al. Tumor hypoxia detected by positron emission tomography with 60Cu-ATSM as a predictor of response and survival in patients undergoing Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal carcinoma: a pilot study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008; 51: 1641-1648.
168. Padhani AR, Koh DM, Collins DJ,. Whole-body diffusion-weighted MR imaging in cancer: current status and research directions. Radiology. 2011; 261: 700-718.
169. Lambregts DM, Maas M, Cappendijk VC, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: current evidence in oncology and potential role in colorectal cancer staging. Eur J Cancer. 2011; 47: 2107-2116.
170. Desch CE, Benson AB 3rd, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Colorectal cancer surveillance: 2005 update of an American Society of Clinical Oncology practice guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 8512-8519.
171. Figueredo A, Rumble RB, Maroun J, et al. Gastrointestinal Cancer Disease Site Group of Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-based Care. Follow-up of patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer: a practice guideline. BMC Cancer. 2003; 3: 26.
172. Jeffery M, Hickey BE, Hider PN,. Follow-up strategies for patients treated for non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(1): CD002200.
173. Renehan AG, Egger M, Saunders MP, O'Dwyer ST,. Impact on survival of intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ. 2002; 324: 813.
174. Rex DK, Kahi CJ, Levin B, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after cancer resection: a consensus update by the American Cancer Society and US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2006; 56: 160-167.
175. Kim HJ, Park SH, Pickhardt PJ, et al. CT colonography for combined colonic and extracolonic surveillance after curative resection of colorectal cancer. Radiology. 2010; 257: 697-704.
176. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. Working Group on Virtual Colonoscopy. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology. 2005; 236: 3-9.
177. Anderson JR, Armitage JO, Weisenburger DD,. Epidemiology of the non-Hodgkin's lymphomas: distributions of the major subtypes differ by geographic locations. Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Classification Project. Ann Oncol. 1998; 9: 717-720.
178. Schoder H, Moskowitz C,. PET imaging for response assessment in lymphoma: potential and limitations. Radiol Clin North Am. 2008; 46: 225-241.
179. Flowers CR, Armitage JO,. A decade of progress in lymphoma: advances and continuing challenges. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2010; 10: 414-423.
180. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 579-586.
181. Noy A, Schöder H, Gönen M, et al. The majority of transformed lymphomas have high standardized uptake values (SUVs) on positron emission tomography (PET) scanning similar to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Ann Oncol. 2009; 20: 508-512.
182. Schöder H, Noy A, Gönen M, et al. Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 4643-4651.
183. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, Ralfkiaer E, Specht L,. Different histopathological subtypes of Hodgkin lymphoma show significantly different levels of FDG uptake. Hematol Oncol. 2006; 24: 146-150.
184. Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G, et al. Utility of FDG-PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood. 2003; 101: 3875-3876.
185. Karam M, Novak L, Cyriac J, Ali A, Nazeer T, Nugent F,. Role of fluorine-18 fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with low-grade lymphomas. Cancer. 2006; 107: 175-183.
186. Wirth A, Foo M, Seymour JF, Macmanus MP, Hicks RJ,. Impact of [18f] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on staging and management of early-stage follicular non-hodgkin lymphoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; 71: 213-219.
187. Weiler-Sagie M, Bushelev O, Epelbaum R, et al. (18)F-FDG avidity in lymphoma readdressed: a study of 766 patients. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51: 25-30.
188. Meignan M, Gallamini A, Haioun C,. Report on the First International Workshop on Interim-PET-Scan in Lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2009; 50: 1257-1260.
189. Buchmann I, Reinhardt M, Elsner K, et al. 2-(fluorine-18)fluoro-2-deoxy- D-glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma. A bicenter trial. Cancer. 2001; 91: 889-899.
190. Weihrauch MR, Re D, Bischoff S, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for initial staging of patients with Hodgkin's disease. Ann Hematol. 2002; 81: 20-25.
191. Elstrom RL, Leonard JP, Coleman M, Brown RK,. Combined PET and low-dose, noncontrast CT scanning obviates the need for additional diagnostic contrast-enhanced CT scans in patients undergoing staging or restaging for lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2008; 19: 1770-1773.
192. Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C, et al. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging-do we need contrast-enhanced CT? Radiology. 2004; 232: 823-829.
193. Schaefer NG, Strobel K, Taverna C, Hany TF,. Bone involvement in patients with lymphoma: the role of FDG-PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007; 34: 60-67.
194. Naumann R, Beuthien-Baumann B, Reiss A, et al. Substantial impact of FDG PET imaging on the therapy decision in patients with early-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma. Br J Cancer. 2004; 90: 620-625.
195. Schoder H, Meta J, Yap C, et al. Effect of whole-body (18)F-FDG PET imaging on clinical staging and management of patients with malignant lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2001; 42: 1139-1143.
196. Rigacci L, Vitolo U, Nassi L, et al. Positron emission tomography in the staging of patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma. A prospective multicentric study by the Intergruppo Italiano Linfomi. Ann Hematol. 2007; 86: 897-903.
197. Terezakis SA, Hunt MA, Kowalski A, et al. [(18)F]FDG-positron emission tomography coregistration with computed tomography scans for radiation treatment planning of lymphoma and hematologic malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011; 81: 615-622.
198. Picardi M, Soricelli A, Grimaldi F, Nicolai E, Gallamini A, Pane F,. Fused FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT detects occult subdiaphragmatic involvement of Hodgkin's lymphoma thereby identifying patients requiring six cycles of anthracycline-containing chemotherapy and consolidation radiation of spleen. Ann Oncol. 2011; 22: 671-680.
199. Rini JN, Leonidas JC, Tomas MB, Palestro CJ,. 18F-FDG PET versus CT for evaluating the spleen during initial staging of lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2003; 44: 1072-1074.
200. Kabickova E, Sumerauer D, Cumlivska E, et al. Comparison of 18F-FDG-PET and standard procedures for the pretreatment staging of children and adolescents with Hodgkin's disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006; 33: 1025-1031.
201. Moulin-Romsee G, Hindie E, Cuenca X, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT bone/bone marrow findings in Hodgkin's lymphoma may circumvent the use of bone marrow trephine biopsy at diagnosis staging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010; 37: 1095-1105.
202. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for posttreatment evaluation in Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood. 1999; 94: 429-433.
203. Naumann R, Vaic A, Beuthien-Baumann B, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography in the evaluation of post-treatment residual mass in patients with Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2001; 115: 793-800.
204. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) after first-line chemotherapy in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: is [18F]FDG-PET a valid alternative to conventional diagnostic methods? J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19: 414-419.
205. Terasawa T, Nihashi T, Hotta T, Nagai H,. 18F-FDG PET for posttherapy assessment of Hodgkin's disease and aggressive Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a systematic review. J Nucl Med. 2008; 49: 13-21.
206. Kobe C, Dietlein M, Franklin J, et al. Positron emission tomography has a high negative predictive value for progression or early relapse for patients with residual disease after first-line chemotherapy in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2008; 112: 3989-3994.
207. Schaefer NG, Taverna C, Strobel K, Wastl C, Kurrer M, Hany TF,. Hodgkin disease: diagnostic value of FDG PET/CT after first-line therapy-is biopsy of FDG-avid lesions still needed? Radiology. 2007; 244: 257-262.
208. Barnes JA, LaCasce AS, Zukotynski K, et al. End-of-treatment but not interim PET scan predicts outcome in nonbulky limited-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2011; 22: 910-915.
209. Friedberg JW, Fischman A, Neuberg D, et al. FDG-PET is superior to gallium scintigraphy in staging and more sensitive in the follow-up of patients with de novo Hodgkin lymphoma: a blinded comparison. Leuk Lymphoma. 2004; 45: 85-92.
210. Han HS, Escalon MP, Hsiao B, Serafini A, Lossos IS,. High incidence of false-positive PET scans in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma treated with rituximab-containing regimens. Ann Oncol. 2009; 20: 309-318.
211. Moskowitz CH, Schoder H, Teruya-Feldstein J, et al. Risk-adapted dose-dense immunochemotherapy determined by interim FDG-PET in Advanced-stage diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 1896-1903.
212. Cashen AF, Dehdashti F, Luo J, Homb A, Siegel BA, Bartlett NL,. 18F-FDG PET/CT for early response assessment in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: poor predictive value of international harmonization project interpretation. J Nucl Med. 2011; 52: 386-392.
213. Terasawa T, Lau J, Bardet S, et al. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for interim response assessment of advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a systematic review. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 1906-1914.
214. Gallamini A, Hutchings M, Rigacci L, et al. Early interim 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to international prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma: a report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25: 3746-3752.
215. Cerci JJ, Pracchia LF, Linardi CC, et al. 18F-FDG PET after 2 cycles of ABVD predicts event-free survival in early and advanced Hodgkin lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51: 1337-1343.
216. Itti E, Lin C, Dupuis J, et al. Prognostic value of interim 18F-FDG PET in patients with diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment at 4 cycles of chemotherapy. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50: 527-533.
217. Lin C, Itti E, Haioun C, et al. Early 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48: 1626-1632.
218. Safar V, Dupuis J, Itti E, et al. Interim [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy plus rituximab. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30: 184-190.
219. Casasnovas RO, Meignan M, Berriolo-Riedinger A, et al. Groupe d'étude des lymphomes de l'adulte (GELA). SUVmax reduction improves early prognosis value of interim positron emission tomography scans in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. 2011; 118: 37-43.
220. Engert A, Diehl V, Franklin J, et al. Escalated-dose BEACOPP in the treatment of patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma: 10 years of follow-up of the GHSG HD9 study. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 4548-4554.
221. Avigdor A, Bulvik S, Levi I, et al. Two cycles of escalated BEACOPP followed by four cycles of ABVD utilizing early-interim PET/CT scan is an effective regimen for advanced high-risk Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2010; 21: 126-132.
222. Dickinson M, Hoyt R, Roberts AW, et al. Improved survival for relapsed diffuse large B cell lymphoma is predicted by a negative pre-transplant FDG-PET scan following salvage chemotherapy. Br J Haematol. 2010; 150: 39-45.
223. Mocikova H, Pytlik R, Markova J, et al. Pre-transplant positron emission tomography in patients with relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2011; 52: 1668-1674.
224. Moskowitz CH, Matasar MJ, Zelenetz AD, et al. Normalization of pre-ASCT, FDG-PET imaging with second-line, non-cross resistant, chemotherapy programs improves event-free survival in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2012; 119: 1665-1670.
225. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, et al. Prognostic value of pretransplantation positron emission tomography using fluorine 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with aggressive lymphoma treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2003; 102: 53-59.
226. Terasawa T, Dahabreh IJ, Nihashi T,. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in response assessment before high-dose chemotherapy for lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncologist. 2010; 15: 750-759.
227. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, et al. Early detection of relapse by whole-body positron emission tomography in the follow-up of patients with Hodgkin's disease. Ann Oncol. 2003; 14: 123-130.
228. Zinzani PL, Stefoni V, Tani M, et al. Role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the follow-up of lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 1781-1787.
229. Lee AI, Zuckerman DS, Van den Abbeele AD, et al. Surveillance imaging of Hodgkin lymphoma patients in first remission: a clinical and economic analysis. Cancer. 2010; 116: 3835-3842.
230. Mocikova H, Obrtlikova P, Vackova B, Trneny M,. Positron emission tomography at the end of first-line therapy and during follow-up in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma: a retrospective study. Ann Oncol. 2010; 21: 1222-1227.
231. Hartridge-Lambert S, Schoder H, Lim R, Maragulia J, Portlock C,. Six cycles of ABVD and a negative PET scan negates the need for radiologic follow-up in early stage, non-bulky Hodgkin lymphoma: MSKCC retrospective analysis [Abstract]. Blood. 2011; 118: Abstract 3139.
232. Abel GA, Vanderplas A, Rodriguez MA, et al. High rates of surveillance imaging for treated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: findings from a large national database. Leuk Lymphoma. 2012; 53: 1113-1116.
233. Liedtke M, Hamlin PA, Moskowitz CH, Zelenetz AD,. Surveillance imaging during remission identifies a group of patients with more favorable aggressive NHL at time of relapse: a retrospective analysis of a uniformly-treated patient population. Ann Oncol. 2006; 17: 909-913.
234. Herrmann K, Buck AK, Schuster T, et al. Predictive value of initial 18F-FLT uptake in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma receiving R-CHOP treatment. J Nucl Med. 2011; 52: 690-696.
235. De Paepe K, Bevernage C, De Keyzer F, et al. 6. 3 Tesla whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging (WB-DWI) for early treatment assessment and treatment prediction in lymphoma. Cancer Imaging. 2011; 11: S178-S179.
236. Gu J, Chan T, Zhang J, Leung AY, Kwong YL, Khong PL,. Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging: the added value to whole-body MRI at initial diagnosis of lymphoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 197: W384-W391.
237. van Ufford HM, Kwee TC, Beek FJ, et al. Newly diagnosed lymphoma: initial results with whole-body T1-weighted, STIR, and diffusion-weighted MRI compared with 18F-FDG PET/CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011; 196: 662-669.