UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of Cerenkov luminescence (CL) imaging of patients undergoing diagnostic (18)F-FDG scans to detect nodal disease. METHODS: Patients undergoing routine (18)F-FDG PET/CT for various malignancies consented to being scanned for CL. White-light and Cerenkov images (5-min acquisition) of the surface of the patient contralateral to and at the site of nodal (18)F-FDG uptake were acquired using a cooled, intensified charge-coupled-device camera. RESULTS: The camera demonstrated linear correlation between activity and counts into the low nanocurie range using (18)F-FDG. Imaging of patients revealed the presence of (18)F-FDG uptake in nodes that demonstrated uptake on PET. A correlation between maximum standardized uptake value from PET and counting rate per area on the CL imaging was established. CONCLUSION: CL imaging with diagnostic doses of (18)F-FDG is feasible and can aid in detecting disease in the clinical setting.
UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of Cerenkov luminescence (CL) imaging of patients undergoing diagnostic (18)F-FDG scans to detect nodal disease. METHODS:Patients undergoing routine (18)F-FDG PET/CT for various malignancies consented to being scanned for CL. White-light and Cerenkov images (5-min acquisition) of the surface of the patient contralateral to and at the site of nodal (18)F-FDG uptake were acquired using a cooled, intensified charge-coupled-device camera. RESULTS: The camera demonstrated linear correlation between activity and counts into the low nanocurie range using (18)F-FDG. Imaging of patients revealed the presence of (18)F-FDG uptake in nodes that demonstrated uptake on PET. A correlation between maximum standardized uptake value from PET and counting rate per area on the CL imaging was established. CONCLUSION: CL imaging with diagnostic doses of (18)F-FDG is feasible and can aid in detecting disease in the clinical setting.
Authors: Daniel L J Thorek; Diane S Abou; Bradley J Beattie; Rachel M Bartlett; Ruimin Huang; Pat B Zanzonico; Jan Grimm Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2012-08-07 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: William L Byrne; Alexandra DeLille; Chaincy Kuo; Johannes S de Jong; Gooitzen M van Dam; Kevin P Francis; Mark Tangney Journal: J Control Release Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 9.776
Authors: Bradley J Beattie; Daniel L J Thorek; Charles R Schmidtlein; Keith S Pentlow; John L Humm; Andreas H Hielscher Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-02-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Adam K Glaser; Rongxiao Zhang; Jacqueline M Andreozzi; David J Gladstone; Brian W Pogue Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Alejandro D Arroyo; Andrea E Guzmán; Alexander V Kachur; Sarah J Saylor; Anatoliy V Popov; E James Delikatny Journal: J Fluor Chem Date: 2019-05-24 Impact factor: 2.050
Authors: Christian Lohrmann; Hanwen Zhang; Daniel L J Thorek; Pooja Desai; Pat B Zanzonico; Joseph O'Donoghue; Christopher P Irwin; Thomas Reiner; Jan Grimm; Wolfgang A Weber Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-04-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Ethan R Balkin; Aimee Kenoyer; Johnnie J Orozco; Alexandra Hernandez; Mazyar Shadman; Darrell R Fisher; Damian J Green; Mark D Hylarides; Oliver W Press; D Scott Wilbur; John M Pagel Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2014-09-26 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Marcello Panagia; Howard H Chen; Dominique Croteau; Yin-Ching Iris Chen; Chongzhao Ran; Ivan Luptak; Lee Josephson; Wilson S Colucci; David E Sosnovik Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 7.792