Accuracy of FDG-PET to diagnose lung cancer in areas with infectious lung disease: A meta-analysis

JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

Volumn 312, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 1227-1236

  Deppen, Stephen A ^a,b   Blume, Jeffrey D ^b   Kensinger, Clark D ^c   Morgan, Ashley M ^b   Aldrich, Melinda C ^b   Massion, Pierre P ^a,b   Walker, Ronald C ^a,b   McPheeters, Melissa L ^b   Putnam, Joe B ^b   Grogan, Eric L ^a,b  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

3' FLUOROTHYMIDINE F 18; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HUMAN; LUNG CANCER; LUNG INFECTION; LUNG NODULE; META ANALYSIS; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREVALENCE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TUMOR VOLUME; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; ENDEMIC DISEASE; INFECTION; LUNG DISEASE; LUNG TUMOR; REVIEW; SCINTISCANNING;

DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; ENDEMIC DISEASES; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; INFECTION; LUNG DISEASES; LUNG NEOPLASMS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84907486935     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.11488     Document Type: Article

References (100)

1. Humphrey LL, Deffebach M, Pappas M, et al. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography: a systematic review to update the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159(6):411-420.
2. Gould MK, Donington J, Lynch WR, et al. Evaluation of individuals with pulmonary nodules: when is it lung cancer? diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest. 2013;143(5)(suppl):e93S-e120S.
3. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines in oncology. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/recently-updated.asp. Accessed May 20, 2014.
4. MacMahon H, Austin JH, Gamsu G, et al; Fleischner Society. Guidelines for management of small pulmonary nodules detected on CT scans: a statement from the Fleischner Society. Radiology. 2005;237(2):395-400.
5. Cronin P, Dwamena BA, Kelly AM, Carlos RC. Solitary pulmonary nodules: meta-analytic comparison of cross-sectional imaging modalities for diagnosis of malignancy. Radiology. 2008;246(3):772-782.
6. Gould MK, Maclean CC, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, Owens DK. Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2001;285(7):914-924.
7. Herder GJ, Golding RP, Hoekstra OS, et al. The performance of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in small solitary pulmonary nodules. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31(9):1231-1236.
8. Silvestri GA, Gould MK, Margolis ML, et al American College of Chest Physicians. Noninvasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer: ACCP evidenced-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition). Chest. 2007;132(3)(suppl):178S-201S.
9. Detterbeck FC, Postmus PE, Tanoue LT. The stage classification of lung cancer: diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest. 2013;143(5)(suppl):e191S-e210S.
10. Deppen S, Putnam JB Jr, Andrade G, et al. Accuracy of FDG-PET to diagnose lung cancer in a region of endemic granulomatous disease. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;92(2):428-433.
11. Croft DR, Trapp J, Kernstine K, et al. FDG-PET imaging and the diagnosis of non-small cell lung cancer in a region of high histoplasmosis prevalence. Lung Cancer. 2002;36(3):297-301.
12. Mason R, Broaddus V, Martin T. In: Murray J, Nadel J, eds. Murray and Nadel's Textbook of Respiratory Medicine. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2010.
13. Bradsher RW. Histoplasmosis and blastomycosis. Clin Infect Dis. 1996;22(suppl 2):S102-S111.
14. Sathekge MM, Maes A, Pottel H, Stoltz A, van de Wiele C. Dual time-point FDG PET-CT for differentiating benign from malignant solitary pulmonary nodules in a TB endemic area. S Afr Med J. 2010;100(9):598-601.
15. Mamede M, Higashi T, Kitaichi M, et al. [18F]FDG uptake and PCNA, Glut-1, and Hexokinase-II expressions in cancers and inflammatory lesions of the lung. Neoplasia. 2005;7(4):369-379.
16. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264-269, W64.
17. Rutter CM, Gatsonis CA. A hierarchical regression approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy evaluations. Stat Med. 2001;20(19):2865-2884.
18. Deeks JJ, Macaskill P, Irwig L. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(9):882-893.
19. Fontela PS, Pant Pai N, Schiller I, Dendukuri N, Ramsay A, Pai M. Quality and reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies in TB, HIV and malaria: evaluation using QUADAS and STARD standards. PLoS One. 2009;4(11):e7753.
20. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM, Kleijnen J. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3(1):25.
21. Ost D, Fein AM, Feinsilver SH. Clinical practice: the solitary pulmonary nodule. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(25):2535-2542.
22. Patel VK, Naik SK, Naidich DP, et al. A practical algorithmic approach to the diagnosis and management of solitary pulmonary nodules: part 2: pretest probability and algorithm. Chest. 2013;143(3):840-846.
23. Gould MK, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, et al. Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139(11):879-892.
24. Chundru S, Wong CY, Wu D, et al. Granulomatous disease: is it a nuisance or an asset during PET/computed tomography evaluation of lung cancers? Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29(7):623-627.
25. Kim SC, Machac J, Krynyckyi BR, et al. Fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography for evaluation of indeterminate lung nodules: assigning a probability of malignancy may be preferable to binary readings [published correction appears in Ann Nucl Med. 2010;24(3):231]. Ann Nucl Med. 2008;22(3):165-170.
26. Bryant AS, Cerfolio RJ. The maximum standardized uptake values on integrated FDG-PET/CT is useful in differentiating benign from malignant pulmonary nodules. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82(3):1016-1020.
27. 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(10):804-811.
28. Kadaria D, Archie DS, SultanAli I, Weiman DS, Freire AX, Zaman MK. Dual time point positron emission tomography/computed tomography scan in evaluation of intrathoracic lesions in an area endemic for histoplasmosis and with high prevalence of sarcoidosis. Am J Med Sci. 2013;346(5):358-362.
29. Sebro R, Aparici CM, Hernandez-Pampaloni M. FDG PET/CT evaluation of pathologically proven pulmonary lesions in an area of high endemic granulomatous disease. Ann Nucl Med. 2013;27(4):400-405.
30. Halter G, Storck M, Guhlmann A, Frank J, Grosse S, Liewald F. FDG positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of peripheral pulmonary focal lesions. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2000;48(2):97-101.
31. Menda Y, Bushnell DL, Madsen MT, McLaughlin K, Kahn D, Kernstine KH. Evaluation of various corrections to the standardized uptake value for diagnosis of pulmonary malignancy. Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22(10):1077-1081.
32. Higashi K, Ueda Y, Sakuma T, et al. Comparison of [(18)F]FDG PET and (201)Tl SPECT in evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med. 2001;42(10):1489-1496.
33. Skehan SJ, Coates G, Otero C, O'Donovan N, Pelling M, Nahmias C. Visual and semiquantitative analysis of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography using a partial-ring tomograph without attenuation correction to differentiate benign and malignant pulmonary nodules. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2001;52(4):259-265.
34. Imdahl A, Jenkner S, Brink I, et al. Validation of FDG positron emission tomography for differentiation of unknown pulmonary lesions. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001;20(2):324-329.
35. Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Yoshida T, et al. Comparison of MET-PET and FDG-PET for differentiation between benign lesions and malignant tumors of the lung. Ann Nucl Med. 2001;15(5):425-431.
36. Uppot RN, Conde K, Sagar V, Manzone T. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging for solitary pulmonary nodules-review of the Delaware experience. Del Med J. 2001;73(10):381-385.
37. Yang SN, Liang JA, Lin FJ, Kwan AS, Kao CH, Shen YY. Differentiating benign and malignant pulmonary lesions with FDG-PET. Anticancer Res. 2001;21(6A):4153-4157.
38. Keith CJ, Miles KA, Griffiths MR, Wong D, Pitman AG, Hicks RJ. Solitary pulmonary nodules: accuracy and cost-effectiveness of sodium iodide FDG-PET using Australian data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29(8):1016-1023.
39. Lee J, Aronchick JM, Alavi A. Accuracy of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the evaluation of malignancy in patients presenting with new lung abnormalities: a retrospective review. Chest. 2001;120(6):1791-1797.
40. Pastorino U, Bellomi M, Landoni C, et al. Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results. Lancet. 2003;362(9384):593-597.
41. Demura Y, Tsuchida T, Ishizaki T, et al. 18F-FDG accumulation with PET for differentiation between benign and malignant lesions in the thorax. J Nucl Med. 2003;44(4):540-548.
42. Buck AK, Hetzel M, Schirrmeister H, et al. Clinical relevance of imaging proliferative activity in lung nodules. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32(5):525-533.
43. Kahn D, Menda Y, Kernstine K, et al. The utility of 99mTc depreotide compared with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and surgical staging in patients with suspected non-small cell lung cancer. Chest. 2004;125(2):494-501.
44. Sachs S, Bilfinger TV. The impact of positron emission tomography on clinical decision making in a university-based multidisciplinary lung cancer practice. Chest. 2005;128(2):698-703.
45. Nomori H, Watanabe K, Ohtsuka T, Naruke T, Suemasu K, Uno K. Visual and semiquantitative analyses for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET scanning in pulmonary nodules 1 cmto 3 cmin size. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;79(3):984-989.
46. Ding QY, Hua YQ, Zhang GZ, et al. A controlled study of positron-emission-tomography and positron-emission-tomography/computed tomography in differential diagnosis of solitary pulmonary nodules-report of 60 cases. Chin Med J (Engl). 2005;118(18):1572-1576.
47. Chhajed PN, Bernasconi M, Gambazzi F, et al. Combining bronchoscopy and positron emission tomography for the diagnosis of the small pulmonary nodule < or = 3 cm. Chest. 2005;128(5):3558-3564.
48. Bastarrika G, García-Velloso MJ, Lozano MD, et al. Early lung cancer detection using spiral computed tomography and positron emission tomography. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171(12):1378-1383.
49. Herder GJ, van Tinteren H, Golding RP, et al. Clinical prediction model to characterize pulmonary nodules: validation and added value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Chest. 2005;128(4):2490-2496.
50. Christensen JA, Nathan MA, Mullan BP, Hartman TE, Swensen SJ, Lowe VJ. Characterization of the solitary pulmonary nodule: 18F-FDG PET versus nodule-enhancement CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;187(5):1361-1367.
51. Yi CA, Lee KS, Kim B-T, et al. Tissue characterization of solitary pulmonary nodule: comparative study between helical dynamic CT and integrated PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(3):443-450.
52. Kim SK, Allen-Auerbach M, Goldin J, et al. Accuracy of PET/CT in characterization of solitary pulmonary lesions. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(2):214-220.
53. Orlacchio A, Schillaci O, Antonelli L, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: morphological and metabolic characterisation by FDG-PET-MDCT. Radiol Med. 2007;112(2):157-173.
54. Tsunezuka Y, Shimizu Y, Tanaka N, Takayanagi T, Kawano M. Positron emission tomography in relation to Noguchi's classification for diagnosis of peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer 2 cmor less in size. World J Surg. 2007;31(2):314-317.
55. Wang F, Wang Z, Yao W, Xie H, Xu J, Tian L. Role of 99mTc-octreotide acetate scintigraphy in suspected lung cancer compared with 18F-FDG dual-head coincidence imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48(9):1442-1448.
56. Veronesi G, Bellomi M, Veronesi U, et al. Role of positron emission tomography scanning in the management of lung nodules detected at baseline computed tomography screening. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;84(3):959-966.
57. Núñez R, Kalapparambath A, Varela J. Improvement in sensitivity with delayed imaging of pulmonary lesions with FDG-PET. Rev Esp Med Nucl. 2007;26(4):196-207.
58. Ohno Y, Koyama H, Takenaka D, et al. Dynamic MRI, dynamic multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT), and coregistered 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/CT: comparative study of capability for management of pulmonary nodules. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27(6):1284-1295.
59. Yamamoto Y, Nishiyama Y, Ishikawa S, et al. 3′-Deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine as a proliferation imaging tracer for diagnosis of lung tumors: comparison with 2-deoxy-2-18f-fluoro-D-glucose. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2008;32(3):432-437.
60. Jeong SY, Lee KS, Shin KM, et al. Efficacy of PET/CT in the characterization of solid or partly solid solitary pulmonary nodules. Lung Cancer. 2008;61(2):186-194.
61. Pauls S, Buck AK, Halter G, et al. Performance of integrated FDG-PET/CT for differentiating benign and malignant lung lesions-results from a large prospective clinical trial. Mol Imaging Biol. 2008;10(2):121-128.
62. Alkhawaldeh K, Bural G, Kumar R, Alavi A. Impact of dual-time-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(2):246-252.
63. Baram D, Bilfinger TV. Interaction of clinical suspicion and PET in the diagnosis of suspected thoracic malignancy. Med Sci Monit. 2008;14(7):CR379-CR383.
64. Degirmenci B, Wilson D, Laymon CM, et al. Standardized uptake value-based evaluations of solitary pulmonary nodules using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/computed tomography. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29(7):614-622.
65. Lan XL, Zhang YX, Wu ZJ, Jia Q, Wei H, Gao ZR. The value of dual time point (18)F-FDG PET imaging for the differentiation between malignant and benign lesions. Clin Radiol. 2008;63(7):756-764.
66. Aukema TS, Valdés Olmos RA, Klomp HM, et al. Evaluation of (18)F-FDG PET-CT for differentiation of pulmonary pathology in an approach of outpatient fast track assessment. J Thorac Oncol. 2009;4(10):1226-1230.
67. Ohba Y, Nomori H, Shibata H, et al. Evaluation of semiquantitative assessments of fluorodeoxyglucose uptake on positron emission tomography scans for the diagnosis of pulmonary malignancies 1 to 3 cmin size. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;87(3):886-891.
68. Schillaci O, Travascio L, Bolacchi F, et al. Accuracy of early and delayed FDG PET-CT and of contrast-enhanced CT in the evaluation of lung nodules: a preliminary study on 30 patients. Radiol Med. 2009;114(6):890-906.
69. Kagna O, Solomonov A, Keidar Z, et al. The value of FDG-PET/CT in assessing single pulmonary nodules in patients at high risk of lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36(6):997-1004.
70. Chang C-Y, Tzao C, Lee S-C, et al. Incremental value of integrated FDG-PET/CT in evaluating indeterminate solitary pulmonary nodule for malignancy. Mol Imaging Biol. 2010;12(2):204-209.
71. Grgic A, Yüksel Y, Gröschel A, et al. Risk stratification of solitary pulmonary nodules by means of PET using (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose and SUV quantification. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37(6):1087-1094.
72. Barnett PG, Ananth L, Gould MK; Veterans Affairs Positron Emission Tomography Imaging in the Management of Patients with Solitary Pulmonary Nodules (VA SNAP) Cooperative Study Group. Cost and outcomes of patients with solitary pulmonary nodules managed with PET scans. Chest. 2010;137(1):53-59.
73. Huang Y-E, Pu Y-L, Huang Y-J, et al. The utility of the nonattenuation corrected 18F-FDG PET images in the characterization of solitary pulmonary lesions. Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31(11):945-951.
74. Ohno Y, Koyama H, Matsumoto K, et al. Differentiation of malignant and benign pulmonary nodules with quantitative first-pass 320-detector row perfusion CT versus FDG PET/CT. Radiology. 2011;258(2):599-609.
75. Macdonald K, Searle J, Lyburn I. The role of dual time point FDG PET imaging in the evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules with an initial standard uptake value less than 2.5. Clin Radiol. 2011;66(3):244-250.
76. Okereke IC, Gangadharan SP, Kent MS, Nicotera SP, DeCamp MM. [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computerized tomography and lung cancer: a significant referral bias exists. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;39(4):560-564.
77. Kubota K, Murakami K, Inoue T, Saga T, Shiomi S. Additional effects of FDG-PET to thin-section CT for the differential diagnosis of lung nodules: a Japanese multicenter clinical study. Ann Nucl Med. 2011;25(10):787-795.
78. Nguyen NC, Kaushik A, Wolverson MK, Osman MM. Is there a common SUV threshold in oncological FDG PET/CT, at least for some common indications? a retrospective study. Acta Oncol. 2011;50(5):670-677.
79. Xu B, Guan Z, Liu C, et al. Can multimodality imaging using 18F-FDG/18F-FLT PET/CT benefit the diagnosis and management of patients with pulmonary lesions? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(2):285-292.
80. García Vicente AM, Castrejón AS, León Martín AA, García BG, Pilkington Woll JP, Muñoz AP. Value of 4-dimensional 18F-FDG PET/CT in the classification of pulmonary lesions. J Nucl Med Technol. 2011;39(2):91-99.
81. Ashraf H, Dirksen A, Loft A, et al. Combined use of positron emission tomography and volume doubling time in lung cancer screening with low-dose CT scanning. Thorax. 2011;66(4):315-319.
82. 18f-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scan in the Nederlands Leuvens Longkanker screenings Onderzoek lung cancer screening trial. J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6(10):1704-1712.
83. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Cancer Imaging. 2012;12(3):437-446.
84. Fiorelli A, Rizzo A, Messina G, et al. Correlation between matrix metalloproteinase 9 and 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose-positron emission tomography as diagnostic markers of lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;41(4):852-860.
85. Dalli A, Selimoglu Sen H, Coskunsel M, et al. Diagnostic value of PET/CT in differentiating benign from malignant solitary pulmonary nodules. J BUON. 2013;18(4):935-941.
86. Lopes Pegna A, Picozzi G, Falaschi F, et al; ITALUNG Study Research Group. Four-year results of low-dose CT screening and nodule management in the ITALUNG trial. J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8(7):866-875.
87. Ohno Y, Nishio M, Koyama H, et al. Comparison of quantitatively analyzed dynamic area-detector CT using various mathematic methods with FDG PET/CT in management of solitary pulmonary nodules. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200(6):W593-W602.
88. Minamimoto R, Senda M, Jinnouchi S, et al. Detection of lung cancer by FDG-PET cancer screening program: a nationwide Japanese survey. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(1):183-189.
89. Zhang J, Cui L-B, Tang X, et al. DWMRI at 3.0 T versus FDG PET/CT for detection of malignant pulmonary tumors. Int J Cancer. 2014;134(3):606-611.
90. Menda Y, Kahn D. Somatostatin receptor imaging of non-small cell lung cancer with 99mTc depreotide. Semin Nucl Med. 2002;32(2):92-96.
91. Acker MR, Burrell SC. Utility of 18F-FDG PET in evaluating cancers of lung. J Nucl Med Technol. 2005;33(2):69-74.
92. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(5):885-895.
93. Beyer T, Antoch G, Müller S, et al. Acquisition protocol considerations for combined PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(1)(suppl 1):25S-35S.
94. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41(8):1369-1379.
95. 18F-FLT PET/CT correlated with the expression of microvessel density of tumour tissue in non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39(8):1289-1296.
96. Dittmann H, Dohmen BM, Paulsen F, et al. [18F]FLT PET for diagnosis and staging of thoracic tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(10):1407-1412.
97. Baylin SB, Jackson RD, Goodwin G, Gazdar AF. Neuroendocrine-related biochemistry in the spectrum of human lung cancers. Exp Lung Res. 1982;3(3-4):209-223.
98. 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(9):1412-1417.
99. Gould MK, Fletcher J, Iannettoni MD, et al American College of Chest Physicians. Evaluation of patients with pulmonary nodules: when is it lung cancer?: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition). Chest. 2007;132(3)(suppl):108S-130S.
100. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al National Lung Screening Trial Research Team. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(5):395-409.