Primary bone tumors

Pediatric PET Imaging

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 267-301

  Howman Giles, Robert ^a   Hicks, Rodney J ^b   McCowage, Geoffrey ^c   Chung, David K ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c CHILDREN S HOSPITAL AT WESTMEAD   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84890002092     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/0-387-34641-4_15     Document Type: Chapter

References (79)

1. Phan A, Patel S. Advances in neoadjuvant chemotherapy in soft tissue sarcomas. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2003;4(6):433-439.
2. Bacci G, Lari S. Current treatment of high grade osteosarcoma of the extremity: review. J Chemother 2001;13(3):235-243.
3. Ballo MT, Zagars GK. Radiation therapy for soft tissue sarcoma. Surg Oncol Clin North Am 2003;12:449-467.
4. Meyers PA, Gorlick R. Osteosarcoma. Pediatr Clin North Am 1997;4: 973-989.
5. Grier HE. The Ewing family of tumors. Pediatr Clin North Am 1997;4: 991-1104.
6. Mirra JM. Osteosarcoma: Intramedullary variants. In: Mirra JM, ed. Bone Tumors. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1989:249-389.
7. Mirra JM, Picci P. Ewing's sarcoma. In: Mirra JM, ed. Bone Tumors. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1989:1087-1117.
8. Arndt CAS, Crist WM. Common musculoskeletal tumors of childhood and adolescence. N Engl J Med 1999;341(5):342-352.
9. Rodriguez-Galindo C, Spunt SL, Pappo AS. Treatment of Ewing sarcoma family of tumors: current status and outlook for the future. Med Pediatr Oncol 2003;40:276-287.
10. Bruland OS, Pihl A. On the current management of osteosarcoma: A critical evaluation and a proposal for a modified treatment strategy. Eur J Cancer 1997;33:1725-1731.
11. Raymond AK, Chawla SP, Carrasco CH, et al. Osteosarcoma chemotherapy effect: A prognostic factor. Semin Diagn Pathol 1987;4:212-236.
12. Eary JF, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, et al. Quantitative [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in pretreatment and grading of sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 1998;4:1215-1220.
13. Brenner W, Bohuslavizki KH, Eary JF. PET imaging of osteosarcoma. J Nucl Med 2003;44(6):930-942.
14. Messa C, Landoni C, Pozzato C, Fazio F. Is there a role for FDG PET in the diagnosis of musculoskeletal neoplasms? J Nucl Med 2000;41(10): 1702-1703.
15. Oliveira AM, Nascimento AG. Grading in soft tissue tumors: principles and problems. Skeletal Radiol 2001;30:543-559.
16. Hicks RJ. Nuclear medicine techniques provide unique physiologic characterization of suspected and known soft tissue and bone sarcomas. Acta Orthop Scand 1997;273(suppl):25-36.
17. Hicks RJ. Functional imaging techniques for evaluation of sarcomas. Cancer Imaging 2005;5:58-65.
18. Hicks RJ, Toner G, Choong PFM. Clinical applications of molecular imaging in sarcoma evaluation. Cancer Imaging 2005;5:66-72.
19. Miller SL, Hoffer FA. Malignant and benign bone tumors. Radiol Clin North Am 2001;39:673.
20. Siegel MJ. Magnetic resonance imaging of musculoskeletal soft tissue masses. Radiol Clin North Am 2001;39:701-720.
21. Rosen G, Caparros B, Groshen S. Primary osteogenic sarcoma of the femur: A model for the use of preoperative chemotherapy in high risk malignant tumours. Cancer Invest 1984;2:181-192.
22. Picci P, Rougraff BT, Bacci G, et al. Prognostic significance of histopathologic response to chemotherapy in non metastatic Ewing sarcoma of the extremity. J Clin Oncol 1993;11:1763-1769.
23. San-Julian M, Dolz R, Garcia-Barrecheguren E, et al. Limb salvage in bone sarcomas in patients younger than age 10. J Pediatr Orthop 2003;23: 753-762.
24. Wodajo FM, Bickels J, Wittig J, Malawer M. Complex reconstruction in the management of extremity sarcomas. Curr Opinion Oncol 2003;15:304-312.
25. Picci P, Sangiorgi L, Rougraff BT, et al. Relationship of chemotherapyinduced necrosis and surgical margins to local recurrence in osteosarcoma. J Clin Oncol 1994;12:2699-2705.
26. Glasser D, Lane J, Huvos A, et al. Survival, prognosis and therapeutic response in osteogenic sarcoma: The Memorial Hospital experience. Cancer 1992;69:698-708.
27. Townsend DW, Beyer T, Blodgett TM. PET/CT scanners: A hardware approach to image fusion. Semin Nucl Med 2003;33:193-204.
28. Kern KA, Brunetti A, Norton JA, et al. Metabolic imaging of human extremity musculoskeletal tumors by PET. J Nucl Med 1988;29:181-186.
29. Adler LP, Blair HF, Makley JT, et al. Noninvasive grading of musculoskeletal tumors using PET. J Nucl Med 1991;32(8):1508-1512.
30. Hoh CK, Hawkins RA, Glaspy JA, et al. Cancer detection with whole-body PET using 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993;17:582-589.
31. Eary JF, O'Sullivan F, Powitan Y, et al. Sarcoma tumor FDG uptake measured by PET and patient outcome: A retrospective analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29(9):1149-1154.
32. Folpe AL, Lyles RH, Sprouse JT, Conrad EU III, Eary JF. (F-18) fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a predictor of pathologic grade and other prognostic variables in bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 2000;6(4):1279-1287.
33. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Heymer B, et al. Grading of tumors and tumorlike lesions of bone: evaluation by FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2000; 41(10):1695-1701.
34. Feldman F, van Heertum R, Manos C. 18FDG PET scanning of benign and malignant musculoskeletal lesions. Skeletal Radiol 2003;32(4):201-208.
35. Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG, Heichel T, et al. The role of quantitative (18)F-FDG PET studies for the differentiation of malignant and benign bone lesions. J Nucl Med 2002;43(4):510-518.
36. Aoki J, Watanabe H, Shinozaki T, et al. FDG PET of primary benign and malignant bone tumors: Standardized uptake value in 52 lesions. Radiology 2001;219(3):774-777.
37. Watanabe H, Shinozaki T, Yanagawa T, et al. Glucose metabolic analysis of musculoskeletal tumours using 18-fluorine-FDG PET as an aid to preoperative planning. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2000;82(5):760-767.
38. Kole AC, Nieweg OE, Hoekstra HJ, van Horn JR, Koops HS, Vaalburg W. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose assessment of glucose metabolism in bone tumors. J Nucl Med 1998;39(5):810-815.
39. Franzius C, Bielack S, Flege S, Sciuk J, Jurgens H, Schober O. Prognostic significance of (18)F-FDG and (99m)Tc-methylene diphosphonate uptake in primary osteosarcoma. J Nucl Med 2002;43(8):1012-1017.
40. Jaramillo D, Laor T, Gebhardt MC. Pediatric musculoskeletal neoplasms: evaluation with MR imaging. MRI Clin North Am 1996;4(4):749-770.
41. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Werner M, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy response of osteogenic sarcoma using FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1999;40(10):1637-1643.
42. Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Sciuk J, et al. FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with spiral CT. Ann Oncol 2001;12:479-486.
43. Lucas JD, O'Doherty MJ, Wong JC, et al. Evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of soft-tissue sarcomas. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1998;80:441-447.
44. Pitman AG, Hicks RJ, Binns DS, et al. Performance of sodium iodide based 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the characterisation of indeterminate pulmonary nodules or masses. Br J Radiol 2002;75:114-121.
45. Franzius C, Sciuk J, Daldrup-Link HE, Jurgens H, Schober O. FDG-PET for detection of osseous metastases from malignant primary bone tumours: comparison with bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(9):1305-1311.
46. Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Wagner-Bohn A, et al. FDG-PET for detection of recurrences from malignant primary bone tumors: comparison with conventional imaging. Ann Oncol 2002;13:157-160.
47. Daldrup-Link HE, Franzius C, Link TM, et al. Whole-body MR imaging for detection of bone metastases in children and young adults: comparison with skeletal scintigraphy and FDG PET. AJR 2001;177(1):229-236.
48. Tacikowska M. Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging in soft tissue tumors-assessment of the diagnostic value of tumor enhancement rate indices. Med Sci Monitor 2002;8(4):MT53-MT57.
49. Negendank WG. MR spectroscopy of musculoskeletal soft-tissue tumors. MRI Clin North Am 1995;3:713-725.
50. Kostakoglu L, Panicek DM, Divgi CR, et al. Correlation of the findings of thallium-201 chloride scans with those of other imaging modalities and histology following therapy in patients with bone and soft tissue sarcomas [erratum in Eur J Nucl Med 1996;23(11):1558]. Eur J Nucl Med 1995;22(11): 1232-1237.
51. Jones DN, McCowage GB, Sostman HD, et al. Monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy response of soft-tissue and musculoskeletal sarcoma using fluorine-18-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 1996;37(9):1438-1444.
52. Franzius C, Sciuk J, Brinkschmidt C, Jurgens H, Schober O. Evaluation of chemotherapy response in primary bone tumors with F-18 FDG positron emission tomography compared with histologically assessed tumor necrosis. Clin Nucl Med 2000;25(11):874-881.
53. Hawkins DS, Rajendran JG, Conrad EU III, Bruckner JD, Eary JF. Evaluation of chemotherapy response in pediatric bone sarcomas by [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography [erratum appears in Cancer 2003;97(12):3130]. Cancer 2002;94(12):3277-3284.
54. Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging: The Visual Response Score and the change in total lesion glycolysis. Clin Positron Imaging 1999;2(3):159-171.
55. Nair N, Ali A, Green AA, et al. Response of osteosarcoma to chemotherapy: evaluation with F-18 FDG-PET scans. Clin Positron Imaging 2000;3: 79-83.
56. Ma LD, Frassica FJ, Scott WW, et al. Differentiation of benign and malignant musculoskeletal tumors: potential pitfalls with MR imaging. Radiographics 1995;15:349-366.
57. Garcia R, Kim EE, Wong FC, et al. Comparison of fluorine-18-FDG PET and technetium-99m-MIBI SPECT in evaluation of musculoskeletal sarcomas. J Nucl Med 1996;37(9):1476-1479.
58. el-Zeftawy H, Heiba SI, Jana S, et al. Role of repeated F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose imaging in management of patients with bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2001;16(1):37-46.
59. Fletcher BD. Imaging pediatric bone sarcomas: Diagnosis and treatment related issues. Radiol Clin North Am 1997;35:1477-1494.
60. Hains SF, O'Doherty MJ, Lucas JD, Smith MA. Fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the evaluation of amputations for soft tissue sarcoma. Nucl Med Commun 1999;20(9):845-848.
61. Blau M, Nagler W, Bender MA. Fluorine-18: A new isotope for bone scanning. J Nucl Med 1962;3:332-334.
62. Schiepers C, Nuyts J, Bormans G, et al. Fluoride kinetics of the axial skeleton measured in vivo with fluorine-18-fluoride PET. J Nucl Med 1997; 38(12):1970-1976.
63. Hoh CK, Hawkins RA, Dahlbom M, et al. Whole body skeletal imaging with [18F]fluoride ion and PET. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1993;17(1):34-41.
64. Cook GJ, Fogelman I. Detection of bone metastases in cancer patients by 18F-fluoride and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Q J Nucl Med 2001;45(1):47-52.
65. Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Kotzerke J, et al. Early detection and accurate description of extent of metastatic bone disease in breast cancer with fluoride ion and positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17(8):2381-2389.
66. Schirrmeister H, Glatting G, Hetzel J, et al. Prospective evaluation of the clinical value of planar bone scans, SPECT, and (18)F-labeled NaF PET in newly diagnosed lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2001;42(12):1800-1804.
67. Schirrmeister H, Guhlmann A, Elsner K, et al. Sensitivity in detecting osseous lesions depends on anatomic localization: planar bone scintigraphy versus 18F PET. J Nucl Med 1999;40(10):1623-1629.
68. Even-Sapir E, Metser U, Flusser G, et al. Assessment of malignant skeletal disease: Initial experience with 18F-fluoride PET/CT and comparison between 18F-fluoride PET and 18F-fluoride PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2004; 45(2):272-278.
69. Jager PL, Franssen EJ, Kool W, et al. Feasibility of tumor imaging using L-3-[iodine-123]-iodo-alpha-methyl-tyrosine in extracranial tumors. J Nucl Med 1998;39(10):1736-1743.
70. Tomiyoshi K, Amed K, Muhammad S, et al. Synthesis of isomers of 18F-labelled amino acid radiopharmaceutical: position 2-and 3-L-18Falpha- methyltyrosine using a separation and purification system. Nucl Med Commun 1997;18(169):175.
71. Watanabe H, Inoue T, Shinozaki T, et al. PET imaging of musculoskeletal tumours with fluorine-18 alpha-methyltyrosine: comparison with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(10):1509-1517.
72. Been LB, Suurmeijer AJH, Cobben DCP, et al. [F18]FLT-PET in oncology: current status and opportunities. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31:1659-1672.
73. Cobben DC, Elsinga PH, Suurmeijer AJH, et al. Detection and grading of soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities with (18)F-fluoro-3?-deoxy-Lthymidine. Clin Cancer Res 2004;10:1685-1690.
74. Ishiwata K, Enomoto K, Sasaki T, et al. A feasibility study on L-[1-carbon-11]tyrosine and L-[methyl-carbon-11]methionine to assess liver protein synthesis by PET. J Nucl Med 1996;37(2):279-285.
75. Inoue T, Kim EE, Wong FC, et al. Comparison of fluorine-18- fluorodeoxyglucose and carbon-11-methionine PET in detection of malignant tumors. J Nucl Med 1996;37(9):1472-1476.
76. Hara T, Yuasa M. Automated synthesis of [11C]choline, a positron-emitting tracer for tumor imaging. Appl Radiat Isotopes 1999;50(3):531-533.
77. Yanagawa T, Watanabe H, Inoue T, et al. Carbon-11 choline positron emission tomography in musculoskeletal tumors: comparison with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2003;27(2):175-182.
78. Zhang H, Tian M, Oriuchi N, et al. 11C-choline PET for the detection of bone and soft tissue tumours in comparison with FDG PET. Nucl Med Commun 2003;24(3):273-279.
79. DeGrado TR, Coleman RE, Wang S, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of 18Flabelled choline as an oncologic tracer for positron emission tomography: Initial findings in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2001;61:110-117.