Literature DB >> 9591582

FDG PET for detection and therapy control of metastatic germ cell tumor.

U Cremerius1, P J Effert, G Adam, O Sabri, M Zimmy, G Wagenknecht, G Jakse, U Buell.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: We investigated the use of PET and 2[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) for detection and therapy control of metastatic germ cell cancer in comparison to CT.
METHODS: Fifty-four PET studies were performed in addition to CT in 33 patients with histopathologically proven germ cell tumors (14 seminomas, 18 nonseminomas, 1 not classified). The scans were done either after initial diagnosis (Group 1; n = 12), within 2 wk after completion of chemotherapy (Group 2; n = 13) or 14-375 days after chemotherapy (Group 3; n = 29). PET and CT were validated either by histology (n = 19) or clinical follow-up for 182-1704 days (n = 35). Focal pathological uptake with PET was quantified using standardized uptake values (SUVs).
RESULTS: PET was significantly more accurate than CT (0.86 versus 0.59; p < 0.025) for detection of residual viable tumor in Group 3. While sensitivities of PET and CT did not differ markedly, PET was significantly more specific than CT. No significant differences between PET and CT were found in Groups 1 and 2. PET scans after therapy resulted in false-negative findings in five of nine cases of Group 2 but only in two of nine cases of Group 3. False-positive PET findings occurred in three inflammatory processes. SUV of seminomas was significantly higher than in nonseminomas (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: PET using FDG is superior to CT for assessment of residual tumor after chemotherapy of germ cell cancer and may thus have an increased effect on patient management in the future. PET must be performed at least 2 wk after completion of therapy. Further data are necessary to determine the role of FDG PET for initial staging of germ cell cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9591582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  28 in total

Review 1.  Molecular Imaging for Evaluation of Viable Testicular Cancer Nodal Metastases.

Authors:  Gregory A Joice; Steven P Rowe; Michael A Gorin; Phillip M Pierorazio
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  [Value of imaging for lymph node metastases from renal cell, bladder, prostate, penile, and testicular cancers].

Authors:  J Stattaus; A Bockisch; M Forsting; S P Müller
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 3.  [Positron emission tomography (PET) for diagnosis and monitoring of treatment for urological tumors].

Authors:  S Machtens; A R Boerner; M Hofmann; W H Knapp; U Jonas
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 0.639

4.  αvβ3 imaging can accurately distinguish between mature teratoma and necrosis in 18F-FDG-negative residual masses after treatment of non-seminomatous testicular cancer: a preclinical study.

Authors:  Nicolas Aide; Mélanie Briand; Pierre Bohn; Soizic Dutoit; Charline Lasnon; Jacques Chasle; Jean Rouvet; Romain Modzelewski; Antony Vela; Edwiges Deslandes; Pierre Vera; Laurent Poulain; Franck Carreiras
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-09-30       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 5.  Quantifying tumour heterogeneity in 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging by texture analysis.

Authors:  Sugama Chicklore; Vicky Goh; Musib Siddique; Arunabha Roy; Paul K Marsden; Gary J R Cook
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2012-10-13       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Fusion imaging: a novel staging modality in testis cancer.

Authors:  Joseph R Sterbis; Kevin R Rice; Marcia C Javitt; Noah S Schenkman; Stephen A Brassell
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2010-11-05       Impact factor: 4.207

7.  The role of [(18)F] FDG-PET, CT/MRI and tumor marker kinetics in the evaluation of post chemotherapy residual masses in metastatic germ cell tumors--prospects for management.

Authors:  Anna C Pfannenberg; Karin Oechsle; Carsten Bokemeyer; Christian Kollmannsberger; Bernhard M Dohmen; Roland Bares; Jörg T Hartmann; Reinhard Vonthein; Claus D Claussen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2004-01-21       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  Limitations of PET for imaging lymphoma.

Authors:  Sally F Barrington; Michael J O'Doherty
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-05-13       Impact factor: 9.236

9.  A comparison between radiolabeled fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and hyperpolarized (13)C-labeled pyruvate utilization as methods for detecting tumor response to treatment.

Authors:  Timothy H Witney; Mikko I Kettunen; Samuel E Day; De-en Hu; Andre A Neves; Ferdia A Gallagher; Sandra M Fulton; Kevin M Brindle
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 5.715

Review 10.  The role of SPET and PET in monitoring tumour response to therapy.

Authors:  Chariklia Giannopoulou
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-06-14       Impact factor: 9.236

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.