Literature DB >> 16741298

18F-FDOPA PET imaging of brain tumors: comparison study with 18F-FDG PET and evaluation of diagnostic accuracy.

Wei Chen1, Daniel H S Silverman, Sibylle Delaloye, Johannes Czernin, Nirav Kamdar, Whitney Pope, Nagichettiar Satyamurthy, Christiaan Schiepers, Timothy Cloughesy.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We evaluated the amino acid and glucose metabolism of brain tumors by using PET with 3,4-dihydroxy-6-(18)F-fluoro-l-phenylalanine ((18)F-FDOPA) and (18)F-FDG.
METHODS: Eighty-one patients undergoing evaluation for brain tumors were studied. Initially, 30 patients underwent PET with (18)F-FDOPA and (18)F-FDG within the same week. Tracer kinetics in normal brain and tumor tissues were estimated. PET uptake was quantified by use of standardized uptake values and the ratio of tumor uptake to normal hemispheric tissue uptake (T/N). In addition, PET uptake with (18)F-FDOPA was quantified by use of ratios of tumor uptake to striatum uptake (T/S) and of tumor uptake to white matter uptake. The accuracies of (18)F-FDOPA and (18)F-FDG PET were determined by comparing imaging data with histologic findings and findings of clinical follow-up of up to 31 mo (mean, 20 mo). To further validate the accuracy of (18)F-FDOPA PET, (18)F-FDOPA PET was performed with an additional 51 patients undergoing brain tumor evaluation.
RESULTS: Tracer uptake in tumors on (18)F-FDOPA scans was rapid, peaking at approximately 15 min after intravenous injection. Tumor uptake could be distinguished from that of the striatum by the difference in peak times. Both high-grade and low-grade tumors were well visualized with (18)F-FDOPA. The sensitivity for identifying tumors was substantially higher with (18)F-FDOPA PET than with (18)F-FDG PET at comparable specificities, as determined by simple visual inspection, especially for the assessment of low-grade tumors. Using receiver-operating-characteristic curve analysis, we found the optimal threshold for (18)F-FDOPA to be a T/S of greater than 1.0 (sensitivity, 96%; specificity, 100%) or a T/N of greater than 1.3 (sensitivity, 96%; specificity, 86%). The high diagnostic accuracy of (18)F-FDOPA PET at these thresholds was confirmed with the additional 51 patients (a total of 81 patients: sensitivity, 98%; specificity, 86%; positive predictive value, 95%; negative predictive value, 95%). No significant difference in tumor uptake on (18)F-FDOPA scans was seen between low-grade and high-grade tumors (P = 0.40) or between contrast-enhancing and nonenhancing tumors (P = 0.97). Radiation necrosis was generally distinguishable from tumors on (18)F-FDOPA scans (P < 0.00001).
CONCLUSION: (18)F-FDOPA PET was more accurate than (18)F-FDG PET for imaging of low-grade tumors and evaluating recurrent tumors. (18)F-FDOPA PET may prove especially useful for imaging of recurrent low-grade tumors and for distinguishing tumor recurrence from radiation necrosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16741298

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  138 in total

1.  Independent prognostic value of pre-treatment 18-FDG-PET in high-grade gliomas.

Authors:  Cécile Colavolpe; Philippe Metellus; Julien Mancini; Maryline Barrie; Céline Béquet-Boucard; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Olivier Mundler; Olivier Chinot; Eric Guedj
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 4.130

2.  Comparison of F-18 FET-PET with F-18 FDG-PET for biopsy planning of non-contrast-enhancing gliomas.

Authors:  Michail Plotkin; C Blechschmidt; G Auf; F Nyuyki; L Geworski; T Denecke; W Brenner; F Stockhammer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-06-03       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Multimodality Brain Tumor Imaging: MR Imaging, PET, and PET/MR Imaging.

Authors:  James R Fink; Mark Muzi; Melinda Peck; Kenneth A Krohn
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 4.  Non-invasive metabolic imaging of brain tumours in the era of precision medicine.

Authors:  Michelle M Kim; Abhijit Parolia; Mark P Dunphy; Sriram Venneti
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 66.675

5.  Treatment response evaluation using 18F-FDOPA PET in patients with recurrent malignant glioma on bevacizumab therapy.

Authors:  Johannes Schwarzenberg; Johannes Czernin; Timothy F Cloughesy; Benjamin M Ellingson; Whitney B Pope; Tristan Grogan; David Elashoff; Cheri Geist; Daniel H S Silverman; Michael E Phelps; Wei Chen
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2014-03-31       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 6.  Opportunities and challenges facing biomarker development for personalized head and neck cancer treatment.

Authors:  Alexandra Lucs; Benjamin Saltman; Christine H Chung; Bettie M Steinberg; David L Schwartz
Journal:  Head Neck       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 3.147

Review 7.  Treatment induced necrosis versus recurrent/progressing brain tumor: going beyond the boundaries of conventional morphologic imaging.

Authors:  Rajan Jain; Jayant Narang; Pia M Sundgren; David Hearshen; Sona Saksena; Jack P Rock; Jorge Gutierrez; Tom Mikkelsen
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2010-02-24       Impact factor: 4.130

Review 8.  Molecular imaging of gliomas with PET: opportunities and limitations.

Authors:  Christian la Fougère; Bogdana Suchorska; Peter Bartenstein; Friedrich-Wilhelm Kreth; Jörg-Christian Tonn
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 12.300

9.  Comparison of visual and semiquantitative analysis of 18F-FDOPA-PET/CT for recurrence detection in glioblastoma patients.

Authors:  Ken Herrmann; Johannes Czernin; Timothy Cloughesy; Albert Lai; Kelsey L Pomykala; Matthias R Benz; Andreas K Buck; Michael E Phelps; Wei Chen
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 12.300

Review 10.  Treating recurrent glioblastoma: an update.

Authors:  Carlos Kamiya-Matsuoka; Mark R Gilbert
Journal:  CNS Oncol       Date:  2015
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.