Oncological applications of positron emission tomography for evaluation of the thorax

Journal of Thoracic Imaging

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 11-24

  Kwee, Thomas C ^a   Torigian, Drew A ^b   Alavi, Abass ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

cancer; fluoro 2 deoxy D glucose; molecular imaging; positron emission tomography; thorax

Indexed keywords

1 FLUORO 3 (2 NITRO 1 IMIDAZOLYL) 2 PROPANOL F 18; 3' FLUOROTHYMIDINE F 18; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR; ERLOTINIB; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GEFITINIB; GLUCOSE 6 PHOSPHATASE; GLUCOSE TRANSPORTER 1; HEXOKINASE; THYMIDINE;

ANGIOGENESIS; APOPTOSIS; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CELL CYCLE REGULATION; CELL MOTILITY; CELL PROLIFERATION; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; ECHOGRAPHY; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FOLLICULAR LYMPHOMA; GENE OVEREXPRESSION; GLUCOSE METABOLISM; HUMAN; HYPOXIA; LARGE CELL LYMPHOMA; LUNG ADENOCARCINOMA; LUNG ALVEOLUS CELL CARCINOMA; LUNG CANCER; LUNG NODULE; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LUNG SMALL CELL CANCER; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); MOLECULAR IMAGING; MORBIDITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PHENOTYPE; PLEURA MESOTHELIOMA; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARDIZATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); THORAX CANCER; THORAX EXAMINATION; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY; THYMOMA; THYMUS CANCER; TREATMENT RESPONSE; TUMOR DIFFERENTIATION; TUMOR GROWTH; TUMOR RECURRENCE; TUMOR VOLUME;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; LUNG; LUNG NEOPLASMS; LYMPHOMA; MESOTHELIOMA; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SOLITARY PULMONARY NODULE; THORAX; THYMUS GLAND; THYMUS NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84871798472     PISSN: 08835993     EISSN: 15360237     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0b013e318279449b     Document Type: Review

References (102)

1. Margulis AR. Molecular imaging: love it or lose it. Radiology. 2012;264:5.
2. Margolis DJ, Hoffman JM, Herfkens RJ, et al. Molecular imaging techniques in body imaging. Radiology. 2007;245: 333-356.
3. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, 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.
4. Warburg O, Posener K, Negelein E. Uber den stoffwechsel der carcinomzelle. Biochem Z. 1924;152:309-335.
5. Minamimoto R, Senda M, Uno K, et al. Performance profile of FDG-PET and PET/CT for cancer screening on the basis of a Japanese Nationwide Survey. Ann Nucl Med. 2007;21: 481-498.
6. Murano T, Minamimoto R, Senda M, et al. Radiation exposure and risk-benefit analysis in cancer screening using FDG-PET: results of a Japanese nationwide survey. Ann Nucl Med. 2011;25:657-666.
7. Khan A. ACR Appropriateness Criteria (R) on Solitary Pulmonary Nodule. J Am Coll Radiol. 2007;4:152-155.
8. Gould MK, Maclean CC, Kuschner WG. Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2001;285: 914-924.
9. Fletcher JW, Kymes SM, Gould M, et al. VA SNAP Cooperative Studies Group. A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET and CT in the characterization of solitary pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:179-185.
10. Li Y, Su M, Li F, et al. The value of 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the differential diagnosis of solitary pulmonary nodules in areas with a high incidence of tuberculosis. Ann Nucl Med. 2011; 25:804-811.
11. Gould MK, Sanders GD, Barnett PG, et al. Cost-effectiveness of alternative management strategies for patients with solitary pulmonary nodules. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:724-735.
12. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480-508.
13. Kagna O, Solomonov A, Keidar Z, et al. Eur J Nucl MedMol Imaging. 2009;36:997-1004.
14. Alkhawaldeh K, Bural G, Kumar R, et al. Impact of dualtime-point (18)F-FDG PET imaging and partial volume correction in the assessment of solitary pulmonary nodules. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:246-252.
15. Pieterman RM, van Putten JW, Meuzelaar JJ, et al. Preoperative staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with positronemission tomography. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:254-261.
16. Gregory DL, Hicks RJ, Hogg A, et al. Effect of PET/CT on management of patients with non-small cell lung cancer: results of a prospective study with 5-year survival data. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1007-1015.
17. Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Shields AF, et al. Relationship between cancer type and impact of PET and PET/CT on intended management: findings of the national oncologic PET registry. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1928-1935.
18. Wu YH, Li PW, Zhang HH, et al. Diagnostic value of 18FFDG PET/CT for the detection of metastases in NSCLC patients: a meta-analysis. Int J Cancer. 2012. [Epub ahead of print]. (In press).
19. Jadvar H, Alavi A, Gambhir SS. 18F-FDG uptake in lung, breast, and colon cancers: molecular biology correlates and disease characterization. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1820-1827.
20. Kwee TC, Basu S, Saboury B, et al. A new dimension of FDG-PET interpretation: assessment of tumor biology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1158-1170.
21. Gillies RJ, Robey I, Gatenby RA. Causes and consequences of increased glucose metabolism of cancers. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(suppl 2):24S-42S.
22. Higashi K, Ueda Y, Seki H, et al. Fluorine-18-FDG PET imaging is negative in bronchioloalveolar lung carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 1998;39:1016-1020.
23. Goudarzi B, Jacene HA, Wahl RL. Diagnosis and differentiation of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma from adenocarcinoma with bronchioloalveolar components with metabolic and anatomic characteristics using PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1585-1592.
24. Liao S, Penney BC, Wroblewski K, et al. Prognostic value of metabolic tumor burden on 18F-FDG PET in nonsurgical patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:27-38.
25. Liao S, Penney BC, Zhang H, et al. Prognostic value of the quantitative metabolic volumetric measurement on 18F-FDG PET/CT in Stage IV nonsurgical small-cell lung cancer. Acad Radiol. 2012;19:69-77.
26. Zhang H, Wroblewski K, Appelbaum D, et al. Independent prognostic value of whole-body metabolic tumor burden from FDG-PET in non-small cell lung cancer. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2012. [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1007/s11548-012-0749-7.
27. Chen HH, Chiu NT, Su WC, et al. Prognostic value of wholebody total lesion glycolysis at pretreatment FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer. Radiology. 2012;264:559-566.
28. Oh JR, Seo JH, Chong A, et al. Whole-body metabolic tumour volume of 18F-FDG PET/CT improves the prediction of prognosis in small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:925-935.
29. Shirai K, Nakagawa A, Abe T, et al. Use of FDG-PET in radiation treatment planning for thoracic cancers. Int J Mol Imaging. 2012;2012:1-9.
30. MacManus M, Nestle U, Rosenzweig K, et al. Use of PET and PET/CT for radiation therapy planning: IAEA expert report 2006-2007. Radiother Oncol. 2009;91:85-94.
31. Lin P, Koh ES, Lin M, et al. Diagnostic and staging impact of radiotherapy planning FDG-PET-CT in non-small-cell lung cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2011;101:284-290.
32. Gondi V, Bradley K, Mehta M, et al. Impact of hybrid fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography on radiotherapy planning in esophageal and non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:187-195.
33. Kruser TJ, Bradley KA, Bentzen SM, et al. The impact of hybrid PET-CT scan on overall oncologic management, with a focus on radiotherapy planning: a prospective, blinded study. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2009;8:149-158.
34. Bradley J, Bae K, Choi N, et al. A phase II comparative study of gross tumor volume definition with or without PET/CT fusion in dosimetric planning for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): primary analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0515. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 82:435-441.e1.
35. Nestle U, Kremp S, Schaefer-Schuler A, et al. Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2005;46: 1342-1348.
36. Biehl KJ, Kong FM, Dehdashti F, et al. 18F-FDG PET definition of gross tumor volume for radiotherapy of nonsmall cell lung cancer: is a single standardized uptake value threshold approach appropriate? J Nucl Med. 2006;47: 1808-1812.
37. Hicks RJ. Role of 18F-FDG PET in assessment of response in non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(suppl 1): 31S-42S.
38. Zander T, Scheffler M, Nogova L, et al. Early prediction of nonprogression in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib by using [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose and [(18)F]fluorothymidine positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1701-1708.
39. Kahraman D, Scheffler M, Zander T, et al. Quantitative analysis of response to treatment with erlotinib in advanced non-small cell lung cancer using 18F-FDG and 30-deoxy-30-18F-fluorothymidine PET. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1871-1877.
40. Huang W, Zhou T, Ma L, et al. Standard uptake value and metabolic tumor volume of 18F-FDG PET/CT predict shortterm outcome early in the course of chemoradiotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1628-1635.
41. Kobe C, Scheffler M, Holstein A, et al. Predictive value of early and late residual 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 18Ffluorothymidine uptake using different SUV measurements in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:1117-1127.
42. Bengtsson T, Hicks RJ, Peterson A, et al. 18F-FDG PET as a surrogate biomarker in non-small cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib: newly identified lesions are more informative than standardized uptake value. J Nucl Med. 2012;53: 530-537.
43. Lopez Guerra JL, Gladish G, Komaki R, et al. Large decreases in standardized uptake values after definitive radiation are associated with better survival of patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2012; 53:225-233.
44. Voltolini L, Paladini P, Luzzi L, et al. Iterative surgical resections for local recurrent and second primary bronchogenic carcinoma. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2000;18:529-534.
45. Hellwig D, Groschel A, Graeter TP, et al. Diagnostic performance and prognostic impact of FDG-PET in suspected recurrence of surgically treated non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:13-21.
46. Keidar Z, Haim N, Guralnik L, et al. PET/CT using 18FFDG in suspected lung cancer recurrence: diagnostic value and impact on patient management. J Nucl Med. 2004;45: 1640-1646.
47. Zhuang H, Pourdehnad M, Lambright ES, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes. J Nucl Med. 2001;42: 1412-1417.
48. Basu S, Alavi A. Partial volume correction of standardized uptake values and the dual time point in FDG-PET imaging: should these be routinely employed in assessing patients with cancer? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1527-1529.
49. Sanz-Viedma S, Torigian DA, Parsons M, et al. Potential clinical utility of dual time point FDG-PET for distinguishing benign from malignant lesions: implications for oncological imaging. Rev Esp Med Nucl. 2009;28:159-166.
50. Basu S, Kung J, Houseni M, et al. Temporal profile of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in malignant lesions and normal organs over extended time periods in patients with lung carcinoma: implications for its utilization in assessing malignant lesions. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;53:9-19.
51. Houseni M, Chamroonrat W, Zhuang J, et al. Prognostic implication of dual-phase PET in adenocarcinoma of the lung. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:535-542.
52. Hustinx R, Smith RJ, Benard F, et al. Dual time point fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: a potential method to differentiate malignancy from inflammation and normal tissue in the head and neck. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:1345-1348.
53. Kumar R, Loving VA, Chauhan A, et al. Potential of dualtime-point imaging to improve breast cancer diagnosis with (18)F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1819-1824.
54. Mavi A, Urhan M, Yu JQ, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging detects breast cancer with high sensitivity and correlates well with histologic subtypes. J Nucl Med. 2006; 47:1440-1446.
55. Basu S, Chen W, Tchou J, et al. Comparison of triplenegative and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma using quantitative fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose/positron emission tomography imaging parameters: a potentially useful method for disease characterization. Cancer. 2008;112:995-1000.
56. Mavi A, Basu S, Cermik TF, et al. Potential of dual time point FDG-PET imaging in differentiating malignant from benign pleural disease. Mol Imaging Biol. 2009;11:369-378.
57. Sohn BS, Lee DH, Kim EK, et al. The role of integrated 18F-FDG PET-CT as a staging tool for limited-stage small cell lung cancer: a retrospective study. Onkologie. 2012;35: 432-438.
58. Van Loon J, Offermann C, Ollers M, et al. Early CT and FDG-metabolic tumour volume changes show a significant correlation with survival in stage I-III small cell lung cancer: a hypothesis generating study. Radiother Oncol. 2011;99: 172-175.
59. Thomson D, Hulse P, Lorigan P, et al. The role of positron emission tomography in management of small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2011;73:121-126.
60. Basu S, Saboury B, Torigian DA, et al. Current evidence base of FDG-PET/CT imaging in the clinical management of malignant pleural mesothelioma: emerging significance of image segmentation and global disease assessment. Mol Imaging Biol. 2011;13:801-811.
61. Kaira K, Serizawa M, Koh Y, et al. Relationship between 18F-FDG uptake on positron emission tomography and molecular biology in malignant pleural mesothelioma. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:1244-1254.
62. Kadota K, Kachala SS, Nitadori JI, et al. High SUVmax on FDG-PET indicates pleomorphic subtype in epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma: supportive evidence to reclassify pleomorphic as nonepithelioid histology. J Thorac Oncol. 2012;7:1192-1197.
63. Abe Y, Tamura K, Sakata I, et al. Clinical implications of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography at delayed phase for diagnosis and prognosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Oncol Rep. 2012;27:333-338.
64. Campbell NP, Kindler HL. Update on malignant pleural mesothelioma. Semin Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;32:102-110.
65. Seam P, Juweid ME, Cheson BD. The role of FDG-PET scans in patients with lymphoma. Blood. 2007;110:3507-3516.
66. 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.
67. Bodet-Milin C, Touzeau C, Leux C, et al. Prognostic impact of 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in untreated mantle cell lymphoma: a retrospective study from the GOELAMS group. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:1633-1642.
68. Le Dortz L, De Guibert S, Bayat S, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic impact of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in follicular lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:2307-2314.
69. Cheson BD. Role of functional imaging in the management of lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1844-1854.
70. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, et al. Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:571-578.
71. Detterbeck FC, Parsons AM. Thymic tumors. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77:1860-1869.
72. Chen G, Marx A, Wen-Hu C, et al. New WHO histologic classification predicts prognosis of thymic epithelial tumors: a clinicopathologic study of 200 thymoma cases from China. Cancer. 2002;95:420-429.
73. Liu Y. Characterization of thymic lesions with F-18 FDG PET-CT: an emphasis on epithelial tumors. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32:554-562.
74. Kaira K, Sunaga N, Ishizuka T, et al. The role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in thymic epithelial tumors. Cancer Imaging. 2011;11:195-201.
75. Kaira K, Murakami H, Miura S, et al. 18F-FDG uptake on PET helps predict outcome and response after treatment in unresectable thymic epithelial tumors. Ann Nucl Med. 2011; 25:247-253.
76. El-Bawab HY, Abouzied MM, Rafay MA, et al. Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography in thymoma recurrence. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2010;11:395-399.
77. Lim HS, Yoon W, Chung TW, et al. FDG PET/CT for the detection and evaluation of breast diseases: usefulness and limitations. Radiographics. 2007;27(suppl 1):S197-S213.
78. Rosen EL, Eubank WB, Mankoff DA. FDG PET, PET/CT, and breast cancer imaging. Radiographics. 2007;27(suppl 1): S215-S229.
79. Adejolu M, Huo L, Rohren E, et al. False-positive lesions mimicking breast cancer on FDG PET and PET/CT. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:W304-W314.
80. Ueda S, Tsuda H, Asakawa H, et al. Clinicopathological and prognostic relevance of uptake level using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography fusion imaging (18F-FDG PET/CT) in primary breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008;38:250-258.
81. Wang CL, MacDonald LR, Rogers JV, et al. Positron emission mammography: correlation of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and 18F-FDG. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:W247-W255.
82. Kim BS, Sung SH. Usefulness of 18F-FDG uptake with clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical prognostic factors in breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2012;26:175-183.
83. Robertson IJ, Hand F, Kell MR. FDG-PET/CT in the staging of local/regional metastases in breast cancer. Breast. 2011;20:491-494.
84. Vinh-Hung V, Everaert H, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic correlates of preoperative FDG PET for breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:1618-1627.
85. Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Espié 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.
86. Riegger C, Herrmann J, Nagarajah J, et al. Whole-body FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for staging primary breast cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:852-863.
87. Niikura N, Costelloe CM, Madewell JE, et al. FDG-PET/CT compared with conventional imaging in the detection of distant metastases of primary breast cancer. Oncologist. 2011;16:1111-1119.
88. Evangelista L, Baretta Z, Vinante L, et al. Tumour markers and FDG PET/CT for prediction of disease relapse in patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38: 293-301.
89. Constantinidou A, Martin A, Sharma B, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of recurrent/metastatic breast cancer: a large retrospective study from the Royal Marsden Hospital. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:307-314.
90. Groheux D, Hindié E, Giacchetti S, et al. Triple-negative breast cancer: early assessment with 18F-FDG PET/CT during neoadjuvant chemotherapy identifies patients who are unlikely to achieve a pathologic complete response and are at a high risk of early relapse. J Nucl Med. 2012;53: 249-254.
91. Ford EC, Lavely WC, Frassica DA, et al. Comparison of FDG-PET/CT and CT for delineation of lumpectomy cavity for partial breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;71:595-602.
92. Walker GV, Niikura N, Yang W, et al. Pretreatment staging positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with inflammatory breast cancer influences radiation treatment field designs. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012; 83:1381-1386.
93. Caroli P, Nanni C, Rubello D, et al. Non-FDG PET in the practice of oncology. Indian J Cancer. 2010;47:120-125.
94. Chitneni SK, Palmer GM, Zalutsky MR, et al. Molecular imaging of hypoxia. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:165-168.
95. Eschmann SM, Paulsen F, Reimold M, et al. Prognostic impact of hypoxia imaging with 18F-misonidazole PET in non-small cell lung cancer and head and neck cancer before radiotherapy. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:253-260.
96. Moran T, Sequist LV. Timing of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy in patients with lung cancer with EGFR mutations. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30: 3330-3336.
97. Nicholson RI, Gee JM, Harper ME. EGFR and cancer prognosis. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37(suppl 4):S9-S15.
98. Miao Z, Ren G, Liu H, et al. PET of EGFR expression with an 18F-labeled affibody molecule. J Nucl Med. 2012;53: 1110-1118.
99. Gabriel M, Decristoforo C, Kendler D, et al. [68Ga]DOTATyr3-octreotide PET in neuroendocrine tumors: comparison with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and CT. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:508-518.
100. Campana D, Ambrosini V, Pezzilli R, et al. Standardized uptake values of (68)Ga-DOTANOC PET: a promising prognostic tool in neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51:353-359.
101. Ambrosini V, Campana D, Bodei L, et al. 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT clinical impact in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:669-673.
102. Mirnezami R, Nicholson J, Darzi A. Preparing for precision medicine. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:489-491.