Comparison of various criteria in interpreting end of therapy F-18 labeled fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Leukemia and Lymphoma

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 714-719

  Manohar, Kuruva ^a   Mittal, Bhagwant Rai ^a   Raja, Senthil ^a   Bhattacharya, Anish ^a   Malhotra, Pankaj ^a   Varma, Subhash ^a  

^a POSTGRADUATE INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH   (India)

Author keywords

Criteria; FDG PET CT; Gallamini criteria; IHP criteria; London; Lymphoma

Indexed keywords

CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE; DOXORUBICIN; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; PREDNISONE; RITUXIMAB; VINCRISTINE;

ARTICLE; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER RECURRENCE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LARGE CELL LYMPHOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMAL RESIDUAL DISEASE; MULTIPLE CYCLE TREATMENT; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LYMPHOMA, NON-HODGKIN; MALE; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED;

EID: 84879526683     PISSN: 10428194     EISSN: 10292403     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/10428194.2012.717693     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Friedberg JW, Mauch PM, Rimsza LM. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. In: DeVita VT, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA, editors. Cancer: Principles & practice of oncology. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008. pp. 2098-2167.
2. Rademaker J. Diagnostic imaging modalities for assessment of lymphoma with special emphasis on CT, MRI, and ultrasound. PET Clin 2006; 1: 219-230.
3. Patrick T, Susan GA, Elizabeth A. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92: 205-216.
4. Avril N, Menzel M, Dose J, et al. Glucose metabolism of breast cancer assessed by 18-F-FDG-PET: Histochemical and immunohistochemical analysis. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 9-16.
5. Hasegawa BH, Iwata K, Wong KH, et al. Dual modality imaging of function and physiology. Acad Radiol 2002; 9: 1305-1321.
6. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 2000; 41: 1369-1379.
7. Cremerius U, Fabry U, Neuerburg J, et al. Positron emission tomography with 18F-FDG to detect residual disease after therapy for malignant lymphoma. Nucl Med Commun 1998; 19: 1055-1063.
8. de Wit M, Bumann D, Beyer W, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) for diagnosis of residual mass in patients with lymphoma. Ann Oncol 1997; 8(Suppl. 1): 57-60.
9. de Wit M, Bohuslavizki KH, Buchert R, et al. 18FDG-PET following treatment as valid predictor for disease-free survival in Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2001; 12: 29-37.
10. Freudenberg LS, Antoch G, Schutt P, et al. FDG-PET/CT in re-staging of patients with lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 325-329.
11. Guay C, Lepine M, Verreault J, et al. Prognostic value of PET using 18F-FDG in Hodgkin's disease for posttreatment evaluation. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 1225-1231.
12. Hueltenschmidt B, Sautter-Bihl M L, Lang O, et al. Whole body positron emission tomography in the treatment of Hodgkin disease. Cancer 2001; 91: 302-310.
13. Jerusalem G, Warland V, Najjar F, et al. Whole-body 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of patients with Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Nucl Med Commun 1999; 20: 13-20.
14. Lang O, Bihl H, Hultenschmidt B, et al. Clinical relevance of positron emission tomography (PET) in treatment control and relapse of Hodgkin's disease. Strahlenther Onkol 2001; 177: 138-144.
15. Lavely WC, Delbeke D, Greer JP, et al. FDG PET in the follow-up management of patients with newly diagnosed Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma after first-line chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003; 57: 307-315.
16. Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, Hain SF, et al. 18-FDG-PET for the assessment of residual masses on CT following treatment of lymphomas. Ann Oncol 2000; 11(Suppl. 1): 147-150.
17. 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.
18. Panizo C, Perez-Salazar M, Bendandi M, et al. Positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for the evaluation of residual Hodgkin's disease mediastinal masses. Leuk Lymphoma 2004; 45: 1829-1833.
19. Reinhardt MJ, Herkel C, Altehoefer C, et al. Computed tomography and 18F-FDG positron emission tomography for therapy control of Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients: When do we really need FDG-PET? Ann Oncol 2005; 16: 1524-1529.
20. Reske SN. PET and restaging of malignant lymphoma including residual masses and relapse. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30(Suppl. 1): S89-S96.
21. Rigacci L, Castagnoli A, Dini C, et al. F-18FDG-positron emission tomography in post treatment evaluation of residual mass in Hodgkin's lymphoma: Long-term results. Oncol Rep 2005; 14: 1209-1214.
22. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, et al. Can positron emission tomography with [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose after first-line treatment distinguish Hodgkin's disease patients who need additional therapy from others in whom additional therapy would mean avoidable toxicity? Br J Haematol 2001; 115: 272-278.
23. Stumpe KD, Urbinelli M, Steinert HC, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using fluorodeoxyglucose for staging of lymphoma: Effectiveness and comparison with computed tomography. Eur J Nucl Med 1998; 25: 721-728.
24. Weihrauch MR, Re D, Scheidhauer K, et al. Th oracic positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for the evaluation of residual mediastinal Hodgkin disease. Blood 2001; 98: 2930-2934.
25. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Lymphoma. 2011. Available from: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls-guidelines.asp
26. Cheson BD, Pfi stner B, Juweid ME, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 579-586.
27. Brepoels L, Stroobants S, De Wever W, et al. Hodgkin lymphoma: Response assessment by revised International Workshop Criteria. Leuk Lymphoma 2007; 48: 1539-1547.
28. Brepoels L, Stroobants S, De Wever W, et al. Aggressive and indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: Response assessment by integrated international workshop criteria. Leuk Lymphoma 2007; 48: 1522-1530.
29. 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 advancedstage Hodgkin's lymphoma: A report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 3746-3752.
30. Barrington SF, Qian W, Somer EJ, et al. Concordance between four European centres of PET reporting criteria designed for use in multicentre trials in Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37: 1824-1833.
31. Schöder H, Moskowitz C. P ET imaging for response assessment in lymphoma: Potential and limitations. Radiol Clin North Am 2008; 46: 225-241.
32. Terasawa T, Nihashi T, Hotta T, et al. 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.
33. Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, O' Doherty MJ, et al. 18-FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in the treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma-comparison with CT. Leuk Lymphoma 2000; 39: 543-553.
34. Hicks RJ, Kalff V, MacManus MP, et al. The utility of 18F-FDG PET for suspected recurrent non-small cell lung cancer after potentially curative therapy: Impact on management and prognostic stratifi cation. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 1605-1613.
35. Lin C, Itti E, Haioun C, et al. Early 18 F FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUVbased assessment versus visual analysis. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 1626-1632.
36. Weiner GJ. Rituximab: Mechanism of action. Semin Hematol 2010; 47: 115-123.
37. 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: 682-688.
38. Le Roux PY, Gastinne T, Le Gouill S, et al. Prognostic value of interim FDG PET/CT in Hodgkin's lymphoma patients treated with interim response adapted strategy: Comparison of International Harmonization Project (IHP), Gallamini and London criteria. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 1064-1071.
39. 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.
40. Boellaard R. S tandards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med 2009; 50(Suppl. 1): 11S-20S.