PURPOSE: Dual-tracer, (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose and (18)F-fluorodeoxythymidine ((18)F-FDG/(18)F-FLT), dual-modality (positron emission tomography and computed tomography, PET/CT) imaging was used in a clinical trial on differentiation of pulmonary nodules. The aims of this trial were to investigate if multimodality imaging is of advantage and to what extent it could benefit the patients in real clinical settings. METHODS: Seventy-three subjects in whom it was difficult to establish the diagnosis and determine management of their pulmonary lesions were prospectively enrolled in this clinical trial. All subjects underwent (18)F-FDG and (18)F-FLT PET/CT imaging sequentially. The images were interpreted with different strategies as either individual or combined modalities. The pathological or clinical evidence during a follow-up period of more than 22 months served as the standard of truth. The diagnostic performance of each interpretation and their impact on clinical decision making was investigated. RESULTS: (18)F-FLT/(18)F-FDG PET/CT was proven to be of clinical value in improving the diagnostic confidence in 28 lung tumours, 18 tuberculoses and 27 other benign lesions. The ratio between maximum standardized uptake values of (18)F-FLT and (18)F-FDG was found to be of great potential in separating the three subgroups of patients. The advantage could only be obtained with the full use of the multimodality interpretation. Multimodality imaging induced substantial change in clinical management in 31.5% of the study subjects and partial change in another 12.3%. CONCLUSION: Multimodality imaging using (18)F-FDG/(18)F-FLT PET/CT provided the best diagnostic efficacy and the opportunity for better management in this group of clinically challenging patients with pulmonary lesions.
PURPOSE: Dual-tracer, (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose and (18)F-fluorodeoxythymidine ((18)F-FDG/(18)F-FLT), dual-modality (positron emission tomography and computed tomography, PET/CT) imaging was used in a clinical trial on differentiation of pulmonary nodules. The aims of this trial were to investigate if multimodality imaging is of advantage and to what extent it could benefit the patients in real clinical settings. METHODS: Seventy-three subjects in whom it was difficult to establish the diagnosis and determine management of their pulmonary lesions were prospectively enrolled in this clinical trial. All subjects underwent (18)F-FDG and (18)F-FLT PET/CT imaging sequentially. The images were interpreted with different strategies as either individual or combined modalities. The pathological or clinical evidence during a follow-up period of more than 22 months served as the standard of truth. The diagnostic performance of each interpretation and their impact on clinical decision making was investigated. RESULTS: (18)F-FLT/(18)F-FDG PET/CT was proven to be of clinical value in improving the diagnostic confidence in 28 lung tumours, 18 tuberculoses and 27 other benign lesions. The ratio between maximum standardized uptake values of (18)F-FLT and (18)F-FDG was found to be of great potential in separating the three subgroups of patients. The advantage could only be obtained with the full use of the multimodality interpretation. Multimodality imaging induced substantial change in clinical management in 31.5% of the study subjects and partial change in another 12.3%. CONCLUSION: Multimodality imaging using (18)F-FDG/(18)F-FLT PET/CT provided the best diagnostic efficacy and the opportunity for better management in this group of clinically challenging patients with pulmonary lesions.
Authors: Hannah M Linden; Svetlana A Stekhova; Jeanne M Link; Julie R Gralow; Robert B Livingston; Georgiana K Ellis; Philip H Petra; Lanell M Peterson; Erin K Schubert; Lisa K Dunnwald; Kenneth A Krohn; David A Mankoff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Shanna K Kim; Martin Allen-Auerbach; Jonathan Goldin; Barbara J Fueger; Magnus Dahlbom; Matthew Brown; Johannes Czernin; Christiaan Schiepers Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Aren van Waarde; David C P Cobben; Albert J H Suurmeijer; Bram Maas; Willem Vaalburg; Erik F J de Vries; Pieter L Jager; Harald J Hoekstra; Philip H Elsinga Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Andreas K Buck; Gisela Halter; Holger Schirrmeister; Jörg Kotzerke; Imke Wurziger; Gerhard Glatting; Torsten Mattfeldt; Bernd Neumaier; Sven N Reske; Martin Hetzel Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Bruce E Hillner; Barry A Siegel; Dawei Liu; Anthony F Shields; Ilana F Gareen; Lucy Hanna; Sharon Hartson Stine; R Edward Coleman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Roswitha Beck; Barbara Röper; Janette Maria Carlsen; Marc Cornelis Huisman; Julia Aloisia Lebschi; Nicolaus Andratschke; Maria Picchio; Michael Souvatzoglou; Hans-Jürgen Machulla; Morand Piert Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Sarah E Chapman; Justin M Diener; Todd A Sasser; Carlos Correcher; Antonio J González; Tony Van Avermaete; W Matthew Leevy Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-10-15
Authors: Stephen A Deppen; Jeffrey D Blume; Clark D Kensinger; Ashley M Morgan; Melinda C Aldrich; Pierre P Massion; Ronald C Walker; Melissa L McPheeters; Joe B Putnam; Eric L Grogan Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Alfred O Ankrah; Tjip S van der Werf; Erik F J de Vries; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Mike M Sathekge; Andor W J M Glaudemans Journal: Clin Transl Imaging Date: 2016-03-07