PURPOSE: Recent studies have suggested that positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with (68)Ga-labelled DOTA-somatostatin analogues (SST) like octreotide and octreotate is useful in diagnosing neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) and has superior value over both CT and planar and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the role of (68)Ga-DOTA-1-NaI(3)-octreotide ((68)Ga-DOTANOC) in patients with SST receptor-expressing tumours and to compare the results of (68)Ga-DOTA-D-Phe(1)-Tyr(3)-octreotate ((68)Ga-DOTATATE) in the same patient population. METHODS: Twenty SRS were included in the study. Patients' age (n = 20) ranged from 25 to 75 years (mean 55.4 ± 12.7 years). There were eight patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumour (WDNET) grade1, eight patients with WDNET grade 2, one patient with poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (PDNEC) grade 3 and one patient with mixed adenoneuroendocrine tumour (MANEC). All patients had two consecutive PET studies with (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (68)Ga-DOTANOC. All images were evaluated visually and maximum standardized uptake values (SUV(max)) were also calculated for quantitative evaluation. RESULTS: On visual evaluation both tracers produced equally excellent image quality and similar body distribution. The physiological uptake sites of pituitary and salivary glands showed higher uptake in (68)Ga-DOTATATE images. Liver and spleen uptake values were evaluated as equal. Both (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (68)Ga-DOTANOC were negative in 6 (30 %) patients and positive in 14 (70 %) patients. In (68)Ga-DOTANOC images only 116 of 130 (89 %) lesions could be defined and 14 lesions were missed because of lack of any uptake. SUV(max) values of lesions were significantly higher on (68)Ga-DOTATATE images. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the images obtained by (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (68)Ga-DOTANOC have comparable diagnostic accuracy. However, (68)Ga-DOTATATE seems to have a higher lesion uptake and may have a potential advantage.
PURPOSE: Recent studies have suggested that positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with (68)Ga-labelled DOTA-somatostatin analogues (SST) like octreotide and octreotate is useful in diagnosing neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) and has superior value over both CT and planar and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the role of (68)Ga-DOTA-1-NaI(3)-octreotide ((68)Ga-DOTANOC) in patients with SST receptor-expressing tumours and to compare the results of (68)Ga-DOTA-D-Phe(1)-Tyr(3)-octreotate ((68)Ga-DOTATATE) in the same patient population. METHODS: Twenty SRS were included in the study. Patients' age (n = 20) ranged from 25 to 75 years (mean 55.4 ± 12.7 years). There were eight patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumour (WDNET) grade1, eight patients with WDNET grade 2, one patient with poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (PDNEC) grade 3 and one patient with mixed adenoneuroendocrine tumour (MANEC). All patients had two consecutive PET studies with (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (68)Ga-DOTANOC. All images were evaluated visually and maximum standardized uptake values (SUV(max)) were also calculated for quantitative evaluation. RESULTS: On visual evaluation both tracers produced equally excellent image quality and similar body distribution. The physiological uptake sites of pituitary and salivary glands showed higher uptake in (68)Ga-DOTATATE images. Liver and spleen uptake values were evaluated as equal. Both (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (68)Ga-DOTANOC were negative in 6 (30 %) patients and positive in 14 (70 %) patients. In (68)Ga-DOTANOC images only 116 of 130 (89 %) lesions could be defined and 14 lesions were missed because of lack of any uptake. SUV(max) values of lesions were significantly higher on (68)Ga-DOTATATE images. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that the images obtained by (68)Ga-DOTATATE and (68)Ga-DOTANOC have comparable diagnostic accuracy. However, (68)Ga-DOTATATE seems to have a higher lesion uptake and may have a potential advantage.
Authors: Michael Gabriel; Clemens Decristoforo; Dorota Kendler; Georg Dobrozemsky; Dirk Heute; Christian Uprimny; Peter Kovacs; Elisabeth Von Guggenberg; Reto Bale; Irene J Virgolini Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: James C Yao; Manal Hassan; Alexandria Phan; Cecile Dagohoy; Colleen Leary; Jeannette E Mares; Eddie K Abdalla; Jason B Fleming; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Asif Rashid; Douglas B Evans Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Damian Wild; Jörg S Schmitt; Mihaela Ginj; Helmut R Mäcke; Bert F Bernard; Eric Krenning; Marion De Jong; Sandra Wenger; Jean-Claude Reubi Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2003-08-21 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Daniel Putzer; Michael Gabriel; Benjamin Henninger; Dorota Kendler; Christian Uprimny; Georg Dobrozemsky; Clemens Decristoforo; Reto Josef Bale; Werner Jaschke; Irene Johanna Virgolini Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-07-17 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Clemens Decristoforo; Roger Knopp; Elisabeth von Guggenberg; Marco Rupprich; Thorsten Dreger; Andre Hess; Irene Virgolini; Roland Haubner Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: Lisa Bodei; Mark Kidd; Vikas Prasad; Richard P Baum; Ignat Drozdov; Irvin M Modlin Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Samira M Sadowski; Vladimir Neychev; Candice Cottle-Delisle; Roxanne Merkel; Lily A Yang; Martha M Quezado; Richard Chang; Electron Kebebew Journal: Gland Surg Date: 2014-11
Authors: Eduardo Aluicio-Sarduy; Nikki A Thiele; Kirsten E Martin; Brett A Vaughn; Justin Devaraj; Aeli P Olson; Todd E Barnhart; Justin J Wilson; Eszter Boros; Jonathan W Engle Journal: Chemistry Date: 2020-01-09 Impact factor: 5.236