Liza Lindenberg1, Esther Mena1, Peter L Choyke1, Kirsten Bouchelouche2. 1. Molecular Imaging Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine & PET Centre, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Worldwide, over 400 000 new cases of kidney cancer were diagnosed and over 175 000 deaths anticipated in 2018. It is ranked as the 14th most common cancer in women and 9th most common in men. Imaging is important for initial detection, staging, and monitoring to assist treatment planning, but conventional anatomic imaging is limited. Although functional PET/CT has proven helpful in the diagnosis and management of many cancers, its value in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is still in evolution. RECENT FINDINGS: FDG is probably the most useful radiotracer in RCC, although CAIX imaging can be helpful in clear cell RCC. Current research on PET imaging agents in RCC including 89Zr bevacizumab, 89Zr geruntuximab, 18F fluoro-L-thymidine (FLT), prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), 11C choline, 18F sodium fluoride (NaF), and18F fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) have shown some interesting results for detection and prognosis of the disease. SUMMARY: Many innovative radiotracers have been tested in RCC, but robust differentiation of primary disease from normal parenchyma remains elusive for almost all of them. The metastatic setting and response to therapy for this cancer are more favorable PET applications. Continued research in promising molecular tracers will hopefully advance both diagnostic and therapeutic strategies to ultimately eradicate RCC.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Worldwide, over 400 000 new cases of kidney cancer were diagnosed and over 175 000 deaths anticipated in 2018. It is ranked as the 14th most common cancer in women and 9th most common in men. Imaging is important for initial detection, staging, and monitoring to assist treatment planning, but conventional anatomic imaging is limited. Although functional PET/CT has proven helpful in the diagnosis and management of many cancers, its value in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is still in evolution. RECENT FINDINGS:FDG is probably the most useful radiotracer in RCC, although CAIX imaging can be helpful in clear cell RCC. Current research on PET imaging agents in RCC including 89Zr bevacizumab, 89Zr geruntuximab, 18F fluoro-L-thymidine (FLT), prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), 11C choline, 18Fsodium fluoride (NaF), and18F fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) have shown some interesting results for detection and prognosis of the disease. SUMMARY: Many innovative radiotracers have been tested in RCC, but robust differentiation of primary disease from normal parenchyma remains elusive for almost all of them. The metastatic setting and response to therapy for this cancer are more favorable PET applications. Continued research in promising molecular tracers will hopefully advance both diagnostic and therapeutic strategies to ultimately eradicate RCC.
Authors: Yafu Yin; Scott P Campbell; Mark C Markowski; Philip M Pierorazio; Martin G Pomper; Mohamad E Allaf; Steven P Rowe; Michael A Gorin Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Glenn Liu; Robert Jeraj; Matt Vanderhoek; Scott Perlman; Jill Kolesar; Michael Harrison; Urban Simoncic; Jens Eickhoff; Lakeesha Carmichael; Bo Chao; Rebecca Marnocha; Percy Ivy; George Wilding Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-10-28 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Sjoukje F Oosting; Adrienne H Brouwers; Suzanne C van Es; Wouter B Nagengast; Thijs H Oude Munnink; Marjolijn N Lub-de Hooge; Harry Hollema; Johan R de Jong; Igle J de Jong; Sanne de Haas; Stefan J Scherer; Wim J Sluiter; Rudi A Dierckx; Alfons H H Bongaerts; Jourik A Gietema; Elisabeth G E de Vries Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-12-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Lino M Sawicki; Christian Buchbender; Johannes Boos; Markus Giessing; Johannes Ermert; Christina Antke; Gerald Antoch; Hubertus Hautzel Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-03-21 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: E L Gerety; E M Lawrence; J Wason; H Yan; S Hilborne; J Buscombe; H K Cheow; A S Shaw; N Bird; K Fife; S Heard; D J Lomas; A Matakidou; D Soloviev; T Eisen; F A Gallagher Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2015-07-22 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Handoo Rhee; John Blazak; Chui Ming Tham; Keng Lim Ng; Benjamin Shepherd; Malcolm Lawson; John Preston; Ian Vela; Paul Thomas; Simon Wood Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2016-10-22 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Chiara Pozzessere; Maria Bassanelli; Anna Ceribelli; Sazan Rasul; Shuren Li; John O Prior; Francesco Cicone Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2019-10-11 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: M Lázaro; B P Valderrama; C Suárez; G de-Velasco; C Beato; I Chirivella; A González-Del-Alba; N Laínez; M J Méndez-Vidal; J A Arranz Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2020-01-28 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Ravindra A De Silva; Michael A Gorin; Ronnie C Mease; Il Minn; Ala Lisok; Donika Plyku; Sridhar Nimmagadda; Mohamad E Allaf; Xing Yang; George Sgouros; Steven P Rowe; Martin G Pomper Journal: J Labelled Comp Radiopharm Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 1.921
Authors: M Fiedorowicz; M I Khan; D Strzemecki; J Orzeł; M Wełniak-Kamińska; A Sobiborowicz; M Wieteska; Z Rogulski; L Cheda; W Wargocka-Matuszewska; K Kilian; C Szczylik; A M Czarnecka Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jean Courcier; Alexandre de la Taille; Maya Nourieh; Ingrid Leguerney; Nathalie Lassau; Alexandre Ingels Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 5.923