18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography as an effective diagnostic workup in cervical metastasis of carcinoma from an unknown primary tumor

Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals

Volumn 27, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 685-693

  Zhao, Kui ^a   Luo, Xing Mei ^a   Zhou, Shui Hong ^a   Liu, Jian Hua ^a   Yan, Sen Xiang ^a   Lu, Zhong Jie ^a   Yang, Shu Ye ^a   Lin, Li Li ^a   Dong, Meng Jie ^a  

^a ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

18F fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography; carcinoma of unknown primary; head and neck; metastasis; standardized uptake value

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER OF UNKNOWN PRIMARY SITE; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER SURVIVAL; CERVICAL LYMPH NODE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAXIMUM STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUE; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; METASTASIS; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIMARY TUMOR; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SURVIVAL RATE; UTERINE CERVIX METASTASIS; HEAD AND NECK TUMOR; LYMPH NODE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PROGNOSIS; SCINTISCANNING; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA;

ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HEAD AND NECK NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; LYMPH NODES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS, UNKNOWN PRIMARY; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROGNOSIS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84870840465     PISSN: 10849785     EISSN: 15578852     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/cbr.2011.1134     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. de Bree R. The real additional value of FDG-PET in detectingthe occult primary tumour in patients with cervical lymphnode metastases of unknown primary tumour. Eur ArchOtorhinolaryngol 2010;267:1653.
2. Waltonen JD, Ozer E, Hall NC, et al. Metastatic carcinoma ofthe neck of unknown primary origin: Evolution and efficacyof the modern workup. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg2009;135:1024.
3. Park JS, Yim JJ, Kang WJ, et al. Detection of primary sites inunknown primary tumors using FDG-PET or FDG-PET/CT.BMC Res Notes 2011;4:56.
4. Deron PB, Bonte KM, Vermeersch HF, et al. Lymph nodemetastasis of squamous cell carcinoma from an unknownprimary in the upper and middle neck: Impact of (18)ffluorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography/ computedtomography. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2011;26:331.
5. Haas I, Hoffmann TK, Engers R, et al. Diagnostic strategiesin cervical carcinoma of an unknown primary (CUP). EurArch Otorhinolaryngol 2002;259:325.
6. Schmalbach C, Miller F. Occult primary head and neckcarcinoma. Curr Oncol Rep 2007;9:139.
7. Akram Al-Ibraheem, Andreas Buck, Bernd Joachim Krause,et al. Clinical Applications of FDG PET and PET/CT inHead and Neck Cancer. J Oncol 2009; 2009: 208725.
8. Rusthoven KE, Koshy M, Paulino AC. The role of fuorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography in cervicallymph nodes metastases from unknown primary tumor.Cancer 2004;101:2642.
9. Solav S, Halnaik D. Two occult primaries discovered on PET/CT in a patient with paraparesis. Clin Nucl Med 2010;35:586.
10. Chihara D, Oki Y, Onoda H, et al. High maximum standarduptake value (SUVmax) on PET scan is associated withshorter survival in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma.Int J Hematol 2011;93:502.
11. Kwee TC, Kwee RM. Combined FDG-PET/CT for the detectionof unknown primary tumors: Systematic review andmeta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2009;19:731.
12. Nassenstein K, Veit-Haibach P, Stergar H, et al. Cervicallymph node metastases of unknown origin: Primary tumordetection with whole-body positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Acta Radiol 2007;23:1.
13. Wartski M, Le Stanc E, Gontier E, et al. In search of anunknown primary tumour presenting with cervical metastases:Performance of hybrid FDG-PET-CT. Nucl MedCommun 2007;28:365.
14. Roh JL, Kim JS, Lee JH, et al. Utility of combined 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography andcomputed tomography in patients with cervical metastasesfrom unknown primary tumors. Oral Oncol 2009;45:218.
15. Pelosi E, Pennone M, Deandreis D, et al. Role of whole bodypositron emission tomography/computed tomography scanwith 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with biopsy proventumor metastases from unknown primary site. Q J Nucl MedMol Imaging 2006;50:15.
16. Hu M, Zhao W, Zhang PL, et al. Clinical applications of 18Ffluorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography/computedtomography in carcinoma of unknown primary. ChinMed J (Engl) 2011;124:1010.
17. Pak K, Kim SJ, Kim IJ, et al. Clinical implication of F-FDGPET/CT in carcinoma of unknown primary. Neoplasma2011;58:135.
18. Keller F, Psychogios G, Linke R, et al. Carcinoma of unknownprimary in the head and neck: Comparison betweenpositron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT. HeadNeck 2011;33:1569.
19. Nakamoto Y, Tatsumi M, Hammoud D, et al. Normal FDGdistribution patterns in the head and neck: PET/CT evaluation.Radiology 2005;234:879.
20. Naresh KN. Do metastatic tumours from an unknown primaryreflect angiogenic incompetence of the tumour at theprimary site?- A hypothesis. Med Hypotheses 2002;59:357.
21. Kole AC, Nieweg OE, Pruim J, et al. Detection of unknownoccult primary tumors using positron emission tomography.Cancer 1998;82:1160.
22. Fencl P, Belohlavek O, Skopalova M, et al. Prognostic anddiagnostic accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in 190 patientswith carcinoma of unknown primary. Eur J Nucl Med MolImaging 2007;34:1783.
23. Kwee TC, Basu S, Alavi A. PET and PET/CT for unknownprimary tumors. Methods Mol Biol 2011;727:317.
24. Kaya AO, Coskun U, Unlu M, et al. Whole body 18F-FDGPET/CT imaging in the detection of primary tumours inpatients with a metastatic carcinoma of unknown origin.Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2008;9:683.
25. Torizuka T, Tanizaki Y, Kanno T, et al. Prognostic value of18F-FDG PET in patients with head and neck squamous cellcancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:W156.
26. Kubicek GJ, Champ C, Fogh S, et al. FDG-PET staging andimportance of lymph node SUV in head and neck cancer.Head Neck Oncol 2010;2:19.
27. Xie P, Li M, Zhao H, et al. 18F-FDG PET or PET-CT toevaluate prognosis for head and neck cancer: A metaanalysis.J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2011;137:1085.
28. Machtay M, Natwa M, Andrel J, et al. Pretreatment FDGPETstandardized uptake value as a prognostic factor foroutcome in head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2009;31:195.
29. Dö bert N, Kovács AF, Menzel C, et al. The prognostic valueof FDG PET in head and neck cancer. Correlation with histopathology.Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;49:253.
30. Haerle SK, Huber GF, Hany TF, et al. Is there a correlationbetween 18F-FDG-PET standardized uptake value,T-classification, histological grading and the anatomicsubsites in newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinomaof the head and neck? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2010;267:1635.
31. Naresh KN. Do metastatic tumours from an unknown primaryreflect angiogenic incompetence of the tumour at theprimary site- A hypothesis. Med Hypotheses 2002;59:357.
32. Kole AC, Nieweg OE, Pruim J, et al. Detection of unknownoccult primary tumors using positron emission tomography.Cancer 1998;82:1160.
33. Fencl P, Belohlavek O, Skopalova M, et al. Prognostic anddiagnostic accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in 190 patientswith carcinoma of unknown primary. Eur J Nucl Med MolImaging 2007;34:1783.
34. Kwee TC, Basu S, Alavi A. PET and PET/CT for unknownprimary tumors. Methods Mol Biol 2011;727:317.
35. Kaya AO, Coskun U, Unlu M, et al. Whole body 18F-FDGPET/CT imaging in the detection of primary tumours inpatients with a metastatic carcinoma of unknown origin.Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2008;9:683.
36. Torizuka T, Tanizaki Y, Kanno T, et al. Prognostic value of18F-FDG PET in patients with head and neck squamous cellcancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:W156.
37. Kubicek GJ, Champ C, Fogh S, et al. FDG-PET staging andimportance of lymph node SUV in head and neck cancer.Head Neck Oncol 2010;2:19.
38. Xie P, Li M, Zhao H, et al. 18F-FDG PET or PET-CT toevaluate prognosis for head and neck cancer: A metaanalysis.J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2011;137:1085.
39. Machtay M, Natwa M, Andrel J, et al. Pretreatment FDGPETstandardized uptake value as a prognostic factor foroutcome in head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2009;31:195.
40. Dö bert N, Kovács AF, Menzel C, et al. The prognostic valueof FDG PET in head and neck cancer. Correlation with histopathology.Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;49:253.
41. Haerle SK, Huber GF, Hany TF, et al. Is there a correlationbetween 18F-FDG-PET standardized uptake value,T-classification, histological grading and the anatomicsubsites in newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinomaof the head and neck? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2010;267:1635.
42. Naresh KN. Do metastatic tumours from an unknown primaryreflect angiogenic incompetence of the tumour at theprimary site?- A hypothesis. Med Hypotheses 2002;59:357.
43. Kole AC, Nieweg OE, Pruim J, et al. Detection of unknownoccult primary tumors using positron emission tomography.Cancer 1998;82:1160.
44. Fencl P, Belohlavek O, Skopalova M, et al. Prognostic anddiagnostic accuracy of [18F]FDG-PET/CT in 190 patientswith carcinoma of unknown primary. Eur J Nucl Med MolImaging 2007;34:1783.
45. Kwee TC, Basu S, Alavi A. PET and PET/CT for unknownprimary tumors. Methods Mol Biol 2011;727:317.
46. Kaya AO, Coskun U, Unlu M, et al. Whole body 18F-FDGPET/CT imaging in the detection of primary tumours inpatients with a metastatic carcinoma of unknown origin.Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2008;9:683.
47. Torizuka T, Tanizaki Y, Kanno T, et al. Prognostic value of18F-FDG PET in patients with head and neck squamous cellcancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:W156.
48. Kubicek GJ, Champ C, Fogh S, et al. FDG-PET staging andimportance of lymph node SUV in head and neck cancer.Head Neck Oncol 2010;2:19.
49. Xie P, Li M, Zhao H, et al. 18F-FDG PET or PET-CT toevaluate prognosis for head and neck cancer: A metaanalysis.J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2011;137:1085.
50. Machtay M, Natwa M, Andrel J, et al. Pretreatment FDGPETstandardized uptake value as a prognostic factor foroutcome in head and neck cancer. Head Neck 2009;31:195.
51. Dö bert N, Kovács AF, Menzel C, et al. The prognostic valueof FDG PET in head and neck cancer. Correlation with histopathology.Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005;49:253.
52. Haerle SK, Huber GF, Hany TF, et al. Is there a correlationbetween 18F-FDG-PET standardized uptake value,T-classification, histological grading and the anatomicsubsites in newly diagnosed squamous cell carcinomaof the head and neck? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2010;267:1635.