[18F] Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in oncology: Initial staging and evaluation of cancer therapy

Medical Principles and Practice

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 427-437

  Pauwels, Ernest K J ^a,b,f   Coumou, Annette W ^c   Kostkiewicz, Magdalena ^d   Kairemo, Kalevi ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PISA   (Italy)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d JAGIELLONIAN UNIVERSITY   (Poland)

^e International Comprehensive Cancer Center Docrates   (Finland)

^f not available   (Italy)

Author keywords

Cancer staging; Interim scanning; Posttreatment evaluation

Indexed keywords

ERLOTINIB; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; YTTRIUM 90; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

BREAST CANCER; CANCER ADJUVANT THERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURVIVAL; CHEMORADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DRUG TUMOR LEVEL; HEAD AND NECK CANCER; HEALTH CARE COST; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HODGKIN DISEASE; HUMAN; LIVER METASTASIS; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; MULTICENTER STUDY (TOPIC); MULTIMODALITY CANCER THERAPY; NONHODGKIN LYMPHOMA; ONCOLOGY; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PATIENT CARE; PREDICTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TREATMENT RESPONSE; CANCER GRADING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC USE; FEMALE; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASMS; PATHOLOGY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROCEDURES; TREATMENT OUTCOME; CANCER CENTER; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER THERAPY; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG UPTAKE; EARLY CANCER; LYMPHOMA; NEOPLASM; NON SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ONCOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PROGRAM COST EFFECTIVENESS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUE; TUMOR TO NORMAL TISSUE RATIO; VISUAL ASSESSMENT;

FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; NEOPLASM GRADING; NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84884285379     PISSN: 10117571     EISSN: 14230151     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000346303     Document Type: Review

References (71)

1. Czernin J, Benz MR, Allen-Auerbach MS: PET/CT imaging: the incremental value of assessing the glucose metabolic phenotype and the structure of cancers in a single examination. Eur J Radiol 2010; 73: 470-480.
2. 18FDG PET scanning in oncology. Br J Cancer 2008; 98: 1597-1601.
3. Keyes JW Jr: SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 1995; 36: 1836-1839.
4. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, et al: Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 1981; 47: 207-214.
5. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al: New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45: 228-247.
6. 18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999. EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer 1999; 35: 1773-1782.
7. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, et al: From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 2009; 50(suppl 1):122S-150S.
8. Avril N, Sassen S, Roylance R: Response to therapy in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2009; 50(suppl 1):55S-63S.
9. 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.
10. 18F-FDG PET/CT in breast cancer patients scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 135: 231-240.
11. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 535-541.
12. Martoni AA, Zamagni C, Quercia S, et al: Early (18)F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography may identify a subset of patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer who will not respond optimally to preoperative chemotherapy. Cancer 2010; 116: 805-813.
13. Keam B, Im SA, Koh Y, et al: Early metabolic response using FDG PET/CT and molecular phenotypes of breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 452.
14. 18F-FDG PET/CT predicts survival after radioembolization of hepatic metastases from breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 371-377.
15. Maziak DE, Darling GE, Inculet RI, et al: Positron emission tomography in staging early lung cancer: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 221-228, W-48.
16. Fischer B, Lassen U, Mortensen J, et al: Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 32-39.
17. Billé A, Pelosi E, Skanjeti A, et al: Preoperative intrathoracic lymph node staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: accuracy of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2009; 36: 440-445.
18. Perigaud C, Bridji B, Roussel JC, et al: Prospective preoperative mediastinal lymph node staging by integrated positron emission tomography-computerised tomography in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2000; 36: 731-736.
19. 18F-FDG PET/CT useful for the early prediction of histopathologic response to neoadjuvant erlotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer? J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 1344-1348.
20. Benz MR, Herrmann K, Walter F, et al: (18)FFDG PET/CT for monitoring treatment responses to the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor erlotinib. J Nucl Med 2011; 52: 1684-1689
21. 18Ffluorodeoxythymidine positron emission tomography imaging in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with erlotinib. Clin Cancer Res 2011; 17: 3304-3315.
22. 18Ffluorothymidine PET. J Nucl Med 2011; 52: 1871-1877.
23. 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.
24. Rosenberg R, Herrmann K, Gertler R, et al: The predictive value of metabolic response to preoperative radiochemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer measured by PET/CT. Int J Colorectal Dis 2009; 24: 191-200.
25. Capirci C, Rampin L, Erba PA, et al: Sequential FDG-PET/CT reliably predicts response of locally advanced rectal cancer to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007; 34: 1583-1593.
26. Lambrecht M, Deroose C, Roels S, et al: The use of FDG-PET/CT and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for response prediction before, during and after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. Acta Oncol 2010; 49: 956-963.
27. Janssen MH, Öllers MC, van Stiphout RG, et al: PET-based treatment response evaluation in rectal cancer: prediction and validation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 82: 871-876.
28. Bellomi M, Rizzo S, Travaini LL, et al: Role of multidetector CT and FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of local and distant recurrence of resected rectal cancer. Radiol Med 2007; 112: 681-690.
29. Metser U, You J, McSweeney S, et al: Assessment of tumor recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer and elevated carcinoembryonic antigen level: FDG PET/CT versus contrast-enhanced 64-MDCT of the chest and abdomen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010; 194: 766-771.
30. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and conventional techniques in the staging of patients with Hodgkin and aggressive non Hodgkin lymphoma. Radiol Med 2008; 113: 578-590.
31. Munker R, Glass J, Griffeth LK, et al: Contribution of PET imaging to the initial staging and prognosis of patients with Hodgkin's disease. Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1699-1704.
32. Shelly MJ, McDermott S, O'Connor OJ, et al: 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of aggressive non-Hodgkin's Bcell lymphoma. ISRN Hematol 2012; 2012: 456706.
33. 18FFDG PET after 2 cycles of ABVD predicts event-free survival in early and advanced Hodgkin lymphoma. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 1337-1443.
34. 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.
35. Gallamini A, Patti C, Viviani S, et al, Gruppo Italiano Terapie Innovative nei Linfomi (GITIL): Early chemotherapy intensification with BEACOPP in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma patients with a interim-PET positive after two ABVD courses. Br J Haematol 2011; 152: 551-560.
36. Kasamon YL: Prognostication and riskadapted therapy of Hodgkin's lymphoma using positron emission tomography. Adv Hematol 2011; 2011: 271595.
37. Zhao J, Qiao W, Wang C, et al: Therapeutic evaluation and prognostic value of interim hybrid PET/CT with (18)F-FDG after three to four cycles of chemotherapy in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Hematology 2007; 12: 423-430.
38. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer 2011; 117: 1010-1018.
39. Qiao W, Zhao J, Wang C, et al: Predictive value of (18)F-FDG hybrid PET/CT for the clinical outcome in patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma prior to and after autologous stem cell transplantation. Hematology 2010; 15: 21-27.
40. Juweid ME: FDG-PET/CT in lymphoma. Methods Mol Biol 2011; 727: 1-19.
41. Zanoni L, Cerci JJ, Fanti S: Use of PET/CT to evaluate response to therapy in lymphoma. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 55: 633-647.
42. Baba S, Abe K, Isoda T, et al: Impact of FDGPET/CT in the management of lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med 2011; 25: 701-716.
43. 18F-FDG-PET/CT for the assessment of necrotic lymph node metastases. Head Neck 2011; 33: 324-329.
44. Carlson ER, Schaefferkoetter J, Townsend D, et al: The use of multiple time point dynamic positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with oral/head and neck cancer does not predictably identify metastatic cervical lymph nodes. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013; 71: 162-77.
45. Connell CA, Corry J, Milner AD, et al: Clinical impact of, and prognostic stratification by, F-18 FDG PET/CT in head and neck mucosal squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck 2007; 29: 986-895.
46. Roh JL, Yeo NK, Kim JS, et al: Utility of 2-[18F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in the preoperative staging of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol 2007; 43: 887-893.
47. Prestwich RJ, Bhatnagar P, Chowdhury FU, et al: The impact of (18)F-FDG PET CT prior to chemoradiotherapy for stage III/IV head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. ISRN Oncol 2012; 2012: 636379.
48. 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with oral cavity cancer with dental artifacts on CT or MR images. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 1422-1428.
49. Tauzin M, Rabalais A, Hagan JL, et al: PETCT staging of the neck in cancers of the oropharynx: patterns of regional and retropharyngeal nodal metastasis. World J Surg Oncol 2010; 8: 70.
50. Xu GZ, Guan DJ, He ZY: (18)FDG-PET/CT for detecting distant metastases and second primary cancers in patients with head and neck cancer. A meta-analysis. Oral Oncol 2011; 47: 560-565.
51. Yoon DH, Cho Y, Kim SY, et al: Usefulness of interim FDG-PET after induction chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck receiving sequential induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 81: 118-125.
52. 18F-FDG PET/CT to improve the accuracy of initial cervical nodal evaluation in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck 2007; 29: 203-210.
53. Ghanooni R, Delpierre I, Magremanne M, et al: FDG PET/CT and MRI in the follow-up of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 2011; 6: 260-266.
54. Prestwich RJ, Subesinghe M, Gilbert A, et al: Delayed response assessment with FDGPET-CT following (chemo)radiotherapy for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Clin Radiol 2012; 67: 966-975.
55. Porceddu SV, Pryor DI, Burmeister E, et al: Results of a prospective study of positron emission tomography-directed management of residual nodal abnormalities in node-positive head and neck cancer after definitive radiotherapy with or without systemic therapy. Head Neck 2011; 33: 1675-1682.
56. Passero VA, Branstetter BF, Shuai Y, et al: Response assessment by combined PET-CT scan versus CT scan alone using RECIST in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy. Ann Oncol 2010; 21: 2278-2283.
57. 18F-FDG PET/CT in assessing the neck after concurrent chemoradiotherapy for locoregional advanced head and neck cancer. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 532-540.
58. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucosepositron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with cervical carcinoma of unknown primary. Med Princ Pract 2005; 14: 155-160.
59. Mak D, Corry J, Lau E, et al: Role of FDGPET/CT in staging and follow-up of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 55: 487-499.
60. Allen-Auerbach M, Weber WA: Measuring response with FDG-PET: methodological aspects. Oncologist 2009; 14: 369-377.
61. Facey K, Bradbury I, Laking G, et al: Overview of the clinical effectiveness of positron emission tomography imaging in selected cancers. Health Technol Assess 2007; 11:iii-iv, xi-267.
62. 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 480-508.
63. Milano A, Perri F, Ciarmiello A, et al: Targeted-therapy and imaging response: a new paradigm for clinical evaluation? Rev Recent Clin Trials 2011; 6: 259-265.
64. Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, et al: FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37: 181-200.
65. Herrmann K, Benz MR, Krause BJ, et al: (18)F-FDG-PET/CT in evaluating response to therapy in solid tumors: where we are and where we can go. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 55: 620-632.
66. 18F]FDGPET-CT for early monitoring of tumor response: when and why. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 53: 167-180.
67. Long NM, Smith CS: Causes and imaging features of false positives and false negatives on F-PET/CT in oncologic imaging. Insights Imaging 2011; 2: 679-698.
68. Leitha T, Staudenherz A: Hybrid PET/CT and SPECT/CT imaging; in Saba L (ed): Computed Tomography-Clinical Applications. 2012. http://www.intechopen. com/books/computed-tomography-clinical-applications/hybrid-pet-ct-and-spect-ct- imaging.
69. Harry VN, Semple SI, Parkin DE, et al: Use of new imaging techniques to predict tumour response to therapy. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11: 92-102.
70. Langer A: A systematic review of PET and PET/CT in oncology: a way to personalize cancer treatment in a cost-effective manner? BMC Health Serv Res 2010; 10: 283.
71. Saif MW, Tzannou I, Makrilia N, et al: Role and cost effectiveness of PET/CT in management of patients with cancer. Yale J Biol Med 2010; 83: 53-65.