Rutger Mahieu1, Dominique N V Donders1, Gerard C Krijger2, F F Tessa Ververs3, Remmert de Roos2, John L M M Bemelmans2, Rob van Rooij2, Remco de Bree1, Bart de Keizer4. 1. Department of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Pharmacy, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, the Netherlands. b.dekeizer@umcutrecht.nl.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy to [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy (including SPECT/CT) in early-stage oral cancer. Furthermore, to assess whether reliable intraoperative SLN localization can be performed with a conventional portable gamma-probe using [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept without the interference of [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept in these patients. METHODS: This prospective within-patient comparison pilot study evaluated SLN identification by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy compared to conventional lymphoscintigraphy using [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept (~ 74 MBq) in 10 early-stage oral cancer patients scheduled for SLN biopsy. After conventional [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy, patients underwent peritumoral administration of [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept (~ 10 MBq) followed by PET/CT acquisition initiated 15 min after injection. Intraoperative SLN localization was performed under conventional portable gamma-probe guidance the next day; the location of harvested SLNs was correlated to both lymphoscintigraphic images in each patient. RESULTS: A total of 24 SLNs were identified by [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy, all except one were also identified by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy. [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy identified 4 additional SLNs near the injection site, of which two harbored metastases. Lymphatic vessels transporting [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept were identified by PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy in 80% of patients, while draining lymphatic vessels were visualized by [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy in 20% of patients. Of the 33 SLNs identified by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy, 30 (91%) were intraoperatively localized under conventional gamma-probe guidance. CONCLUSION: [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy provided more accurate identification of SLNs and improved visualization of lymphatic vessels compared to [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy. When combined with peritumoral administration of [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept, SLNs detected by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy can be reliably localized during surgery under conventional gamma-probe guidance.
PURPOSE: To compare sentinel lymph node (SLN) identification using [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy to [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy (including SPECT/CT) in early-stage oral cancer. Furthermore, to assess whether reliable intraoperative SLN localization can be performed with a conventional portable gamma-probe using [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept without the interference of [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept in these patients. METHODS: This prospective within-patient comparison pilot study evaluated SLN identification by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy compared to conventional lymphoscintigraphy using [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept (~ 74 MBq) in 10 early-stage oral cancer patients scheduled for SLN biopsy. After conventional [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy, patients underwent peritumoral administration of [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept (~ 10 MBq) followed by PET/CT acquisition initiated 15 min after injection. Intraoperative SLN localization was performed under conventional portable gamma-probe guidance the next day; the location of harvested SLNs was correlated to both lymphoscintigraphic images in each patient. RESULTS: A total of 24 SLNs were identified by [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy, all except one were also identified by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy. [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy identified 4 additional SLNs near the injection site, of which two harbored metastases. Lymphatic vessels transporting [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept were identified by PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy in 80% of patients, while draining lymphatic vessels were visualized by [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy in 20% of patients. Of the 33 SLNs identified by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy, 30 (91%) were intraoperatively localized under conventional gamma-probe guidance. CONCLUSION: [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy provided more accurate identification of SLNs and improved visualization of lymphatic vessels compared to [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept lymphoscintigraphy. When combined with peritumoral administration of [99mTc]Tc-tilmanocept, SLNs detected by [68Ga]Ga-tilmanocept PET/CT lymphoscintigraphy can be reliably localized during surgery under conventional gamma-probe guidance.
Authors: Nicklas Juel Pedersen; David Hebbelstrup Jensen; Nora Hedbäck; Martin Frendø; Katalin Kiss; Giedrius Lelkaitis; Jann Mortensen; Anders Christensen; Lena Specht; Christian von Buchwald Journal: Head Neck Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Derrek A Heuveling; Annelies van Schie; Danielle J Vugts; N Harry Hendrikse; Maqsood Yaqub; Otto S Hoekstra; K Hakki Karagozoglu; C René Leemans; Guus A M S van Dongen; Remco de Bree Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2013-02-01 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Derrek A Heuveling; Géke B Flach; Annelies van Schie; Stijn van Weert; K Hakki Karagozoglu; Elisabeth Bloemena; C René Leemans; Remco de Bree Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: Lee W T Alkureishi; Gary L Ross; Taimur Shoaib; David S Soutar; A Gerry Robertson; Richard Thompson; Keith D Hunter; Jens A Sorensen; Jorn Thomsen; Annelise Krogdahl; Julio Alvarez; Luis Barbier; Joseba Santamaria; Tito Poli; Enrico Sesenna; Adorjan F Kovács; Frank Grünwald; Luigi Barzan; Sandro Sulfaro; Franco Alberti Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-06-15 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Géke B Flach; Mark Tenhagen; Remco de Bree; Ruud H Brakenhoff; Isaac van der Waal; Elisabeth Bloemena; Dirk J Kuik; Jonas A Castelijns; C René Leemans Journal: Oral Oncol Date: 2012-09-08 Impact factor: 5.337
Authors: Derrek A Heuveling; K Hakki Karagozoglu; Arthur Van Lingen; Otto S Hoekstra; Guus A M S Van Dongen; Remco De Bree Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Remco de Bree; Bart de Keizer; Francisco J Civantos; Robert P Takes; Juan P Rodrigo; Juan C Hernandez-Prera; Gyorgy B Halmos; Alessandra Rinaldo; Alfio Ferlito Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2020-12-28 Impact factor: 2.503