Anatomical and functional volume concordance between FDG PET, and T2 and diffusion-weighted MRI for cervical cancer: A hybrid PET/MR study

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 41, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 898-905

  Sun, Hongzan ^a   Xin, Jun ^a   Zhang, Shaomin ^a   Guo, Qiyong ^a   Lu, Yueyue ^a   Zhai, Wei ^a   Zhao, Long ^a   Peng, Weiai ^b   Wang, Baijun ^c  

^a CHINA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b PHILIPS HEALTHCARE   (United States)

^c PHILIPS RESEARCH LABORATORIES   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cervical cancer; DW imaging; SUV based tumour volume definition

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIFFUSION COEFFICIENT; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MOLECULAR IMAGING; PET-MRI SCANNER; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT PLANNING; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; WHOLE BODY IMAGING; CARCINOMA; DIAGNOSTIC USE; EVALUATION STUDY; MIDDLE AGED; SCINTISCANNING; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

ADULT; AGED; CARCINOMA; DIFFUSION MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 84899080143     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: 16197089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-013-2668-4     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Gaertner FC, Furst S, Schwaiger M. PET/MR: a paradigm shift. Cancer Imaging. 2013;13:36-52.
2. Kidd EA, Grigsby PW. Intratumoral metabolic heterogeneity of cervical cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:5236-41.
3. Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. The standardized uptake value for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose is a sensitive predictive biomarker for cervical cancer treatment response and survival. Cancer. 2007;110:1738-44.
4. Sala E, Rockall AG, Freeman SJ, Mitchell DG, Reinhold C. The added role of MR imaging in treatment stratification of patients with gynecologic malignancies: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiology. 2013;266:717-40.
5. Miller TR, Grigsby PW. Measurement of tumor volume by PET to evaluate prognosis in patients with advanced cervical cancer treated by radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:353-9.
6. Upasani MN, Mahantshetty UM, Rangarajan V, Purandare N, Merchant N, Thakur M, et al. 18-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography-based gross tumor volume estimation and validation with magnetic resonance imaging for locally advanced cervical cancers. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2012;22:1031-6.
7. Herneth AM, Guccione S, Bednarski M. Apparent diffusion coefficient: a quantitative parameter for in vivo tumor characterization. Eur J Radiol. 2003;45:208-13.
8. McVeigh PZ, Syed AM, Milosevic M, Fyles A, Haider MA. Diffusion-weighted MRI in cervical cancer. Eur Radiol. 2008;18:1058-64.
9. Ho KC, Lin G, Wang JJ, Lai CH, Chang CJ, Yen TC. Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficients measured by 3 T diffusion-weighted MRI and SUV from FDG PET/CT in primary cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:200-8.
10. Olsen JR, Esthappan J, DeWees T, Narra VR, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, et al. Tumor volume and subvolume concordance between FDG-PET/CT and diffusion-weighted MRI for squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013;37:431-4.
11. Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:932-45.
12. Zaidi H, Ojha N, Morich M, Griesmer J, Hu Z, Maniawski P, et al. Design and performance evaluation of a whole-body Ingenuity TF PET-MRI system. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56:3091-106.
13. Jung DC, Ju W, Choi HJ, Kang S, Park S, Yoo CW, et al. The validity of tumour diameter assessed by magnetic resonance imaging and gross specimen with regard to tumour volume in cervical cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:1524-8.
14. Mayr NA, Taoka T, Yuh WT, Denning LM, Zhen WK, Paulino AC, et al. Method and timing of tumor volume measurement for outcome prediction in cervical cancer using magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;52:14-22.
15. King AD, Ahuja AT, Yeung DK, Fong DK, Lee YY, Lei KI, et al. Malignant cervical lymphadenopathy: diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology. 2007;245:806-13.
16. Pui MH, Wang QY, Xu B, Fan GP. MRI of gynecological neoplasm. Clin Imaging. 2004;28:143-52.
17. Ma DJ, Zhu JM, Grigsby PW. Tumor volume discrepancies between FDG-PET and MRI for cervical cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2011;98:139-42.
18. Schramm G, Langner J, Hofheinz F, Petr J, Beuthien-Baumann B, Platzek I, et al. Quantitative accuracy of attenuation correction in the Philips Ingenuity TF whole-body PET/MR system: a direct comparison with transmission-based attenuation correction. MAGMA. 2013;26:115-26.
19. Thie JA. Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1431-4.
20. Lucignani G. SUV and segmentation: pressing challenges in tumour assessment and treatment. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:715-20.
21. Patterson DM, Padhani AR, Collins DJ. Technology insight: water diffusion MRI - a potential new biomarker of response to cancer therapy. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008;5:220-33.
22. Hamstra DA, Rehemtulla A, Ross BD. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging: a biomarker for treatment response in oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4104-9.
23. Nakamura K, Joja I, Kodama J, Hongo A, Hiramatsu Y. Measurement of SUVmax plus ADCmin of the primary tumour is a predictor of prognosis in patients with cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:283-90.
24. Bos R, van Der Hoeven JJ, van Der Wall E, van Der Groep P, van Diest PJ, Comans EF, et al. Biologic correlates of (18)fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in human breast cancer measured by positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:379-87.
25. Higano S, Yun X, Kumabe T, Watanabe M, Mugikura S, Umetsu A, et al. Malignant astrocytic tumors: clinical importance of apparent diffusion coefficient in prediction of grade and prognosis. Radiology. 2006;241:839-46.
26. Heusch P, Buchbender C, Kohler J, Nensa F, Beiderwellen K, Kuhl H, et al. Correlation of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) with the standardized uptake value (SUV) in hybrid 18F-FDG PET/MRI in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) lesions: initial results. Rofo. 2013;185:1056-62.