PURPOSE: Hypoxia is an important negative prognostic factor for radiation treatment of head and neck cancer. This study was performed to evaluate the feasibility of use of (18)F-labelled fluoroazomycin arabinoside ([(18)F]FAZA) for clinical PET imaging of tumour hypoxia. METHODS: Eleven patients (age 59.6 +/- 9 years) with untreated advanced head and neck cancer were included. After injection of approximately 300 MBq of [(18)F]FAZA, a dynamic sequence up to 60 min was acquired on an ECAT HR+ PET scanner. In addition, approximately 2 and 4 h p.i., static whole-body PET (n = 5) or PET/CT (n = 6) imaging was performed. PET data were reconstructed iteratively (OSEM) and fused with CT images (either an external CT or the CT of integrated PET/CT). Standardised uptake values (SUVs) and tumour-to-muscle (T/M) ratios were calculated in tumour and normal tissues. Also, the tumour volume displaying a T/M ratio >1.5 was determined. RESULTS: Within the first 60 min of the dynamic sequence, the T/M ratio generally decreased, while generally increasing at later time points. At 2 h p.i., the tumour SUV(max) and SUV(mean) were found to be 2.3 +/- 0.5 (range 1.5-3.4) and 1.4 +/- 0.3 (range 1.0-2.1), respectively. The mean T/M ratio at 2 h p.i. was 2.0 +/- 0.3 (range 1.6-2.4). The tumour volume displaying a T/M ratio above 1.5 was highly variable. At 2 h p.i., [(18)F]FAZA organ distribution was determined as follows: kidney > gallbladder > liver > tumour > muscle > bone > brain > lung. CONCLUSION: [(18)F]FAZA PET imaging appears feasible in head and neck cancer patients, and the achieved image quality is adequate for clinical purposes. Based on our initial results, [(18)F]FAZA warrants further evaluation as a hypoxia PET tracer for imaging of cancer.
PURPOSE:Hypoxia is an important negative prognostic factor for radiation treatment of head and neck cancer. This study was performed to evaluate the feasibility of use of (18)F-labelled fluoroazomycin arabinoside ([(18)F]FAZA) for clinical PET imaging of tumour hypoxia. METHODS: Eleven patients (age 59.6 +/- 9 years) with untreated advanced head and neck cancer were included. After injection of approximately 300 MBq of [(18)F]FAZA, a dynamic sequence up to 60 min was acquired on an ECAT HR+ PET scanner. In addition, approximately 2 and 4 h p.i., static whole-body PET (n = 5) or PET/CT (n = 6) imaging was performed. PET data were reconstructed iteratively (OSEM) and fused with CT images (either an external CT or the CT of integrated PET/CT). Standardised uptake values (SUVs) and tumour-to-muscle (T/M) ratios were calculated in tumour and normal tissues. Also, the tumour volume displaying a T/M ratio >1.5 was determined. RESULTS: Within the first 60 min of the dynamic sequence, the T/M ratio generally decreased, while generally increasing at later time points. At 2 h p.i., the tumour SUV(max) and SUV(mean) were found to be 2.3 +/- 0.5 (range 1.5-3.4) and 1.4 +/- 0.3 (range 1.0-2.1), respectively. The mean T/M ratio at 2 h p.i. was 2.0 +/- 0.3 (range 1.6-2.4). The tumour volume displaying a T/M ratio above 1.5 was highly variable. At 2 h p.i., [(18)F]FAZA organ distribution was determined as follows: kidney > gallbladder > liver > tumour > muscle > bone > brain > lung. CONCLUSION: [(18)F]FAZA PET imaging appears feasible in head and neck cancerpatients, and the achieved image quality is adequate for clinical purposes. Based on our initial results, [(18)F]FAZA warrants further evaluation as a hypoxia PET tracer for imaging of cancer.
Authors: W J Koh; J S Rasey; M L Evans; J R Grierson; T K Lewellen; M M Graham; K A Krohn; T W Griffin Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1992 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Rodney J Hicks; Danny Rischin; Richard Fisher; David Binns; Andrew M Scott; Lester J Peters Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2005-08-26 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: M Souvatzoglou; S I Ziegler; M J Martinez; R Busch; G Dzewas; M Schwaiger; F Bengel Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-09-05 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Morand Piert; Hans-Jürgen Machulla; Maria Picchio; Gerald Reischl; Sybille Ziegler; Piyush Kumar; Hans-Jürgen Wester; Roswitha Beck; Alexander J B McEwan; Leonard I Wiebe; Markus Schwaiger Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Bernd Gagel; Patrick Reinartz; Ercole Dimartino; Michael Zimny; Michael Pinkawa; Payam Maneschi; Sven Stanzel; Kurt Hamacher; Heinz H Coenen; Michael Westhofen; Ulrich Büll; Michael J Eble Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: W J Koh; K S Bergman; J S Rasey; L M Peterson; M L Evans; M M Graham; J R Grierson; K L Lindsley; T K Lewellen; K A Krohn Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1995-09-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Stéphanie Servagi-Vernat; Sarah Differding; Francois-Xavier Hanin; Daniel Labar; Anne Bol; John A Lee; Vincent Grégoire Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-02-26 Impact factor: 9.236