Literature DB >> 16733687

The added value of metabolic imaging with FDG-PET in oesophageal cancer: prognostic role and prediction of response to treatment.

Emilio Bombardieri.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  2006        PMID： 16733687     DOI： 10.1007/s00259-006-0147-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging        ISSN： 1619-7070            Impact factor:   9.236


× No keyword cloud information.
  38 in total

Review 1.  Esophageal cancer: CT, endoscopic US, and FDG PET for assessment of response to neoadjuvant therapy--systematic review.

Authors:  Marinke Westerterp; Henderik L van Westreenen; Johannes B Reitsma; Otto S Hoekstra; Jaap Stoker; Paul Fockens; Pieter L Jager; Berthe L F Van Eck-Smit; John T M Plukker; J Jan B van Lanschot; Gerrit W Sloof
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Evaluation of the accuracy of preoperative staging in thoracic esophageal cancer.

Authors:  T Nishimaki; O Tanaka; N Ando; H Ide; H Watanabe; M Shinoda; W Takiyama; H Yamana; K Ishida; K Isono; M Endo; T Ikeuchi; T Mitomi; H Koizumi; M Imamura; T Iizuka
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Comparison of positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and endoscopic ultrasound in the initial staging of patients with esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Val J Lowe; Fargol Booya; J G Fletcher; Mark Nathan; Eric Jensen; Brian Mullan; Eric Rohren; Maurits J Wiersema; Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros; Joseph A Murray; Mark S Allen; Michael J Levy; Jonathan E Clain
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.488

4.  The additional value of PET/CT over PET in FDG imaging of oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Rachel Bar-Shalom; Ludmila Guralnik; Medy Tsalic; Max Leiderman; Alex Frenkel; Diana Gaitini; Alon Ben-Nun; Zohar Keidar; Ora Israel
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2005-04-19       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 5.  The current status of FDG-PET in tumour volume definition in radiotherapy treatment planning.

Authors:  Angela van Baardwijk; Brigitta G Baumert; Geert Bosmans; Marinus van Kroonenburgh; Sigrid Stroobants; Vincent Gregoire; Philippe Lambin; Dirk De Ruysscher
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2006-03-24       Impact factor: 12.111

6.  Is there a role for FGD-PET in radiotherapy planning in esophageal carcinoma?

Authors:  Olga Vrieze; Karin Haustermans; Walter De Wever; Toni Lerut; Eric Van Cutsem; Nadine Ectors; Martin Hiele; Patrick Flamen
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 6.280

7.  Evaluation of metastatic celiac axis lymph nodes in patients with esophageal carcinoma: accuracy of EUS.

Authors:  M F Catalano; E Alcocer; A Chak; C C Nguyen; I Raijman; J E Geenen; S Lahoti; M V Sivak
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  The incremental effect of positron emission tomography on diagnostic accuracy in the initial staging of esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Kato; Tatsuya Miyazaki; Masanobu Nakajima; Junko Takita; Hitoshi Kimura; Ahmad Faried; Makoto Sohda; Yasuyuki Fukai; Norihiro Masuda; Minoru Fukuchi; Ryokuhei Manda; Hitoshi Ojima; Katsuhiko Tsukada; Hiroyuki Kuwano; Noboru Oriuchi; Keigo Endo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-01-01       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 9.  Position of positron emission tomography and other imaging diagnostic modalities in esophageal cancer.

Authors:  P Flamen; T Lerut; K Haustermans; E Van Cutsem; L Mortelmans
Journal:  Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.346

10.  Impact of FDG-PET for staging of oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Andreas Imdahl; M Hentschel; M Kleimaier; U T Hopt; I Brink
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 3.445
View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Personalized versus evidence-based medicine with PET-based imaging.

Authors:  Sandip Basu
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-08-10       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  Should FDG-PET imaging be considered on a routine basis in clinical trials for carcinoma of esophagus to assure uniformity of protocols among sites?

Authors:  Sandip Basu; Abass Alavi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Staging with PET and the "Will Rogers" effect: redefining prognosis and survival in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Sandip Basu; Abass Alavi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Evaluation of response: is 18F-FDG PET the answer?

Authors:  Arturo Chiti
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 5.  Neoadjuvant treatment for advanced esophageal cancer: response assessment before surgery and how to predict response to chemoradiation before starting treatment.

Authors:  Elfriede Bollschweiler; Arnulf H Hölscher; Matthias Schmidt; Ute Warnecke-Eberz
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.087

6.  Mean and maximum standardized uptake values in [18F]FDG-PET for assessment of histopathological response in oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma after radiochemotherapy.

Authors:  Matthias Schmidt; Elfriede Bollschweiler; Markus Dietlein; Stefan P Mönig; Carsten Kobe; Daniel Vallböhmer; Daniel Vallboehmer; Wolfgang Eschner; Arnulf Hölscher; Harald Schicha
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-12-19       Impact factor: 9.236

7.  Semiautomatic volume of interest drawing for (18)F-FDG image analysis-method and preliminary results.

Authors:  A J Green; R J Francis; S Baig; R H J Begent
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-10-02       Impact factor: 9.236

8.  Molecular imaging in tumor angiogenesis and relevant drug research.

Authors:  Xibo Ma; Jie Tian; Xin Yang; Chenghu Qin
Journal:  Int J Biomed Imaging       Date:  2011-07-25
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.