Literature DB >> 19380406

18F-FDG PET and 18F-FDG PET/CT for assessing response to therapy in esophageal cancer.

Bernd Joachim Krause1, Ken Herrmann, Hinrich Wieder, Christian Meyer zum Büschenfelde.   

Abstract

In patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer, preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy has been shown to improve outcome with respect to survival. Patients who respond to induction therapy have a significantly improved survival, compared with patients who do not respond to the therapy. However, surrogate markers that predict response or prognosis-especially early in the course of therapy-are not available in clinical routine. In patients with esophageal cancer, PET with the glucose analog (18)F-FDG can be used for assessing response to therapy. Therapy response can be assessed with (18)F-FDG PET and (18)F-FDG PET/CT late, that is, after completion of therapy, and early in the course of therapy. In adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction, (18)F-FDG has been established and validated in several studies as a surrogate marker that allows prediction of response and prognosis, whereas in other studies (18)F-FDG PET was not predictive of response and prognosis. The MUNICON study was an initial unicenter trial showing that a PET-guided treatment algorithm was feasible in patients with adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. The results of this study are important toward individualization of multimodal treatment. The use of (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT for therapy monitoring in esophageal cancer is the subject of intense discussion, underlining the need for randomized multicenter studies. From a methodologic point of view, the most important issue in therapy monitoring using (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT is the standardization of patient preparation, data acquisition and processing, and data interpretation, especially for prospective randomized multicenter studies. In conclusion, single-center studies investigating response assessment in patients with esophageal cancer have provided promising results. In the future, prospective randomized multicenter trials will have to be performed and research will address new imaging probes and innovative therapy regimens.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19380406     DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.057232

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


  25 in total

Review 1.  Computerized PET/CT image analysis in the evaluation of tumour response to therapy.

Authors:  W Lu; J Wang; H H Zhang
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-02-27       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 2.  Metabolic positron emission tomography imaging in cancer detection and therapy response.

Authors:  Aizhi Zhu; Daniel Lee; Hyunsuk Shim
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 3.  Positron Emission Tomography (PET) in Oncology.

Authors:  Andrea Gallamini; Colette Zwarthoed; Anna Borra
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2014-09-29       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 4.  Present status and progress of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Jing Liu; Jinbo Yue; Ligang Xing; Jinming Yu
Journal:  Front Med       Date:  2013-05-17       Impact factor: 4.592

Review 5.  A systematic review of the predictive value of (18)FDG-PET in esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation on the survival outcome stratification.

Authors:  Pascaline Schollaert; Ralph Crott; Claude Bertrand; Lionel D'Hondt; Thierry Vander Borght; Bruno Krug
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 6.  Adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy for operable esophagogastric cancer?

Authors:  Sing Yu Moorcraft; Elizabeth C Smyth; David Cunningham
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 7.370

7.  Impact on Radiological and Pathological Response with Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation and Its Effect on Survival in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Thoracic Esophagus.

Authors:  Abhinav Dewan; S K Sharma; A K Dewan; Ruparna Khurana; Manoj Gupta; Anjali Pahuja; Himanshu Srivastava; Rupal Sinha
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2017-03

8.  Multimodality imaging to assess immediate response to irreversible electroporation in a rat liver tumor model.

Authors:  Yue Zhang; Sarah B White; Jodi R Nicolai; Zhuoli Zhang; Derek L West; Dong-Hyun Kim; A Lee Goodwin; Frank H Miller; Reed A Omary; Andrew C Larson
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 9.  State-of-the-art molecular imaging in esophageal cancer management: implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment.

Authors:  Jolinta Lin; Seth Kligerman; Rakhi Goel; Payam Sajedi; Mohan Suntharalingam; Michael D Chuong
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-02

10.  The predictive value of treatment response using FDG PET performed on day 21 of chemoradiotherapy in patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. A prospective, multicentre study (RTEP3).

Authors:  Odré Palie; Pierre Michel; Jean-François Ménard; Caroline Rousseau; Emmanuel Rio; Boumédiene Bridji; Ahmed Benyoucef; Marc-Etienne Meyer; Khadija Jalali; Stéphane Bardet; Che Mabubu M'vondo; Pierre Olivier; Guillaume Faure; Emmanuel Itti; Christian Diana; Claire Houzard; Françoise Mornex; Frederic Di Fiore; Pierre Vera
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-05-29       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.