nach oben

Annals of Nuclear Medicine

Erschienen in:

01.12.2011 | Invited review article

Impact of FDG-PET/CT in the management of lymphoma

verfasst von: Shingo Baba, Koichiro Abe, Takuro Isoda, Yasuhiro Maruoka, Masayuki Sasaki, Hiroshi Honda

Erschienen in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine | Ausgabe 10/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Since the introduction of ⁶⁷Gallium-citrate 30 years ago, nuclear medicine has played an important role in the evaluation of malignant lymphoma. During that time, several radiotracers were evaluated as potential alternatives for the diagnosis of lymphoma, but the introduction of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET (FDG-PET) marked a major turning point. FDG-PET took over most of the role of gallium, and is now an essential tool in the diagnosis of lymphoma. FDG-PET is increasingly being used for assessment of the tumor staging prior to treatment, for evaluating the response to treatment, and for monitoring the early reactions to therapy to predict the final outcome. FDG-PET has been shown to have more accurate diagnostic capability than conventional CT and MRI for distinguishing the tumor necrosis and residual masses frequently seen after therapy in lymphoma patients without any clinical and biochemical manifestation. Malignant lymphoma is the first disease for which FDG-PET was adopted as a tool for response assessment in the international standard criteria. However, lymphoma does not always display a clear high uptake, and there are some pitfalls in assessing the response to therapy. This review will highlight the most important applications of FDG-PET in lymphoma, focusing on the advantages and pitfalls of this imaging, and past and ongoing efforts to standardize the use of FDG-PET, particularly in response to assessment and therapy monitoring.

Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, Gascoyne RD, Specht L, Horning SJ, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:579–86.PubMedCrossRef

Surbone A, Longo DL, DeVita VT Jr, Ihde DC, Duffey PL, Jaffe ES, et al. Residual abdominal masses in aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after combination chemotherapy: significance and management. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6:1832–7.PubMed

Canellos GP. Residual mass in lymphoma may not be residual disease. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6:931–3.PubMed

Kaplan WD, Jochelson MS, Herman TS, Nadler LM, Stomper PC, Takvorian T, et al. Gallium-67 imaging: a predictor of residual tumor viability and clinical outcome in patients with diffuse large-cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8:1966–70.PubMed

Front D, Bar-Shalom R, Mor M, Haim N, Epelbaum R, Frenkel A, et al. Aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma: early prediction of outcome with 67Ga scintigraphy. Radiology. 2000;214:253–7.PubMed

Vose JM, Bierman PJ, Anderson JR, Harrison KA, Dalrymple GV, Byar K, et al. Single-photon emission computed tomography gallium imaging versus computed tomography: predictive value in patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:2473–9.PubMed

Janicek M, Kaplan W, Neuberg D, Canellos GP, Shulman LN, Shipp MA. Early restaging gallium scans predict outcome in poor-prognosis patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma treated with high-dose CHOP chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:1631–7.PubMed

Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B, Shipp MA, Fisher RI, Connors JM, et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1244.

Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, Mottaghy FM, Dietlein M, Guermazi A, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:571–8.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Sasaki M, Kuwabara Y, Koga H, Nakagawa M, Chen T, Kaneko K, et al. Clinical impact of whole body FDG-PET on the staging and therapeutic decision making for malignant lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med. 2002;16:337–45.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Yamamoto F, Tsukamoto E, Nakada K, Takei T, Zhao S, Asaka M, et al. 18F-FDG PET is superior to 67Ga SPECT in the staging of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med. 2004;18:519–26.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Rademaker J. Radiologic clinics of North America. Imaging of lymphoma. Preface. Radiol Clin North Am. 2008;46:xiii.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Weiler-Sagie M, Bushelev O, Epelbaum R, Dann EJ, Haim N, Avivi I, et al. (18)F-FDG avidity in lymphoma readdressed: a study of 766 patients. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:25–30.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Paes FM, Kalkanis DG, Sideras PA, Serafini AN. FDG PET/CT of extranodal involvement in non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease. Radiographics. 2010;30:269–91.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Najjar F, Hustinx R, Fassotte MF, Rigo P, et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) for the staging of low-grade non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Ann Oncol. 2001;12:825–30.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G, Nakhoda K, Vergilio JA, Zhuang H, et al. Utility of FDG-PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood. 2003;101:3875–6.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Bishu S, Quigley JM, Schmitz J, Bishu SR, Stemm RA, Olsasky SM, et al. F-18-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography in the assessment of peripheral T-cell lymphomas. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48:1531–8.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Kako S, Izutsu K, Ota Y, Minatani Y, Sugaya M, Momose T, et al. FDG-PET in T-cell and NK-cell neoplasms. Ann Oncol. 2007;18:1685–90.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Isasi CR, Lu P, Blaufox MD. A metaanalysis of 18F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography in the staging and restaging of patients with lymphoma. Cancer. 2005;104:1066–74.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Moog F, Bangerter M, Diederichs CG, Guhlmann A, Kotzerke J, Merkle E, et al. Lymphoma: role of whole-body 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) PET in nodal staging. Radiology. 1997;203:795–800.PubMed

21.

Moog F, Bangerter M, Diederichs CG, Guhlmann A, Merkle E, Frickhofen N, et al. Extranodal malignant lymphoma: detection with FDG PET versus CT. Radiology. 1998;206:475–81.PubMed

22.

Buchmann I, Reinhardt M, Elsner K, Bunjes D, Altehoefer C, Finke J, et al. 2-(fluorine-18)fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma. A bicenter trial. Cancer. 2001;91:889–99.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Bangerter M, Moog F, Buchmann I, Kotzerke J, Griesshammer M, Hafner M, et al. Whole-body 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for accurate staging of Hodgkin’s disease. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:1117–22.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Bangerter M, Kotzerke J, Griesshammer M, Elsner K, Reske SN, Bergmann L. Positron emission tomography with 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in the staging and follow-up of lymphoma in the chest. Acta Oncol. 1999;38:799–804.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, Najjar F, Paulus P, Rigo P, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose compared to standard procedures for staging patients with Hodgkin’s disease. Haematologica. 2001;86:266–73.PubMed

26.

Partridge S, Timothy A, O’Doherty MJ, Hain SF, Rankin S, Mikhaeel G. 2-Fluorine-18-fluoro-2-deoxy-d glucose positron emission tomography in the pretreatment staging of Hodgkin’s disease: influence on patient management in a single institution. Ann Oncol. 2000;11:1273–9.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Weihrauch MR, Re D, Bischoff S, Dietlein M, Scheidhauer K, Krug B, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for initial staging of patients with Hodgkin’s disease. Ann Hematol. 2002;81:20–5.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Menzel C, Dobert N, Mitrou P, Mose S, Diehl M, Berner U, et al. Positron emission tomography for the staging of Hodgkin’s lymphoma—increasing the body of evidence in favor of the method. Acta Oncol. 2002;41:430–6.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Naumann R, Beuthien-Baumann B, Reiss A, Schulze J, Hanel A, Bredow J, et al. Substantial impact of FDG PET imaging on the therapy decision in patients with early-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Br J Cancer. 2004;90:620–5.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, Pedersen LM, Berthelsen AK, Keiding S, et al. Position emission tomography with or without computed tomography in the primary staging of Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Haematologica. 2006;91:482–9.PubMed

31.

Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C, Seifert B, Stumpe KD, von Schulthess GK, et al. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging—do we need contrast-enhanced CT? Radiology. 2004;232:823–9.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Wirth A, Seymour JF, Hicks RJ, Ware R, Fisher R, Prince M, et al. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, gallium-67 scintigraphy, and conventional staging for Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Am J Med. 2002;112:262–8.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Pelosi E, Pregno P, Penna D, Deandreis D, Chiappella A, Limerutti G, et al. Role of whole-body [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and conventional techniques in the staging of patients with Hodgkin and aggressive non Hodgkin lymphoma. Radiol Med. 2008;113:578–90.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Munker R, Glass J, Griffeth LK, Sattar T, Zamani R, Heldmann M, et al. Contribution of PET imaging to the initial staging and prognosis of patients with Hodgkin’s disease. Ann Oncol. 2004;15:1699–704.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Rigacci L, Vitolo U, Nassi L, Merli F, Gallamini A, Pregno P, et al. Positron emission tomography in the staging of patients with Hodgkin’s lymphoma. A prospective multicentric study by the Intergruppo Italiano Linfomi. Ann Hematol. 2007;86:897–903.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Allen-Auerbach M, Quon A, Weber WA, Obrzut S, Crawford T, Silverman DH, et al. Comparison between 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography hardware fusion for staging of patients with lymphoma. Mol Imaging Biol. 2004;6:411–6.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Nogami M, Nakamoto Y, Sakamoto S, Fukushima K, Okada T, Saga T, et al. Diagnostic performance of CT, PET, side-by-side, and fused image interpretations for restaging of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med. 2007;21:189–96.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Rodriguez-Vigil B, Gomez-Leon N, Pinilla I, Hernandez-Maraver D, Coya J, Martin-Curto L, et al. PET/CT in lymphoma: prospective study of enhanced full-dose PET/CT versus unenhanced low-dose PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1643–8.PubMed

39.

Elstrom RL, Leonard JP, Coleman M, Brown RK. Combined PET and low-dose, noncontrast CT scanning obviates the need for additional diagnostic contrast-enhanced CT scans in patients undergoing staging or restaging for lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:1770–3.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Freudenberg LS, Antoch G, Schutt P, Beyer T, Jentzen W, Muller SP, et al. FDG-PET/CT in re-staging of patients with lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:325–9.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Seam P, Juweid ME, Cheson BD. The role of FDG-PET scans in patients with lymphoma. Blood. 2007;110:3507–16.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Pakos EE, Fotopoulos AD, Ioannidis JP. 18F-FDG PET for evaluation of bone marrow infiltration in staging of lymphoma: a meta-analysis. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:958–63.PubMed

43.

Juweid ME. 18F-FDG PET as a routine test for posttherapy assessment of Hodgkin’s disease and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: where is the evidence? J Nucl Med. 2008;49:9–12.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Lister TA, Crowther D, Sutcliffe SB, Glatstein E, Canellos GP, Young RC, et al. Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin’s disease: Cotswolds meeting. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:1630–6.PubMed

45.

Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Role of positron emission tomography in lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4577–80.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:496–507.PubMedCrossRef

47.

Juweid ME. Utility of positron emission tomography (PET) scanning in managing patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. Hematol Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2006;259–265:510–1.

48.

de Wit M, Bumann D, Beyer W, Herbst K, Clausen M, Hossfeld DK. Whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) for diagnosis of residual mass in patients with lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 1997;8(Suppl 1):57–60.PubMedCrossRef

49.

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, Najjar F, Paulus P, Rigo P, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for posttreatment evaluation in Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood. 1999;94:429–33.PubMed

50.

Zinzani PL, Magagnoli M, Chierichetti F, Zompatori M, Garraffa G, Bendandi M, et al. The role of positron emission tomography (PET) in the management of lymphoma patients. Ann Oncol. 1999;10:1181–4.PubMedCrossRef

51.

Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, Hain SF, O’Doherty MJ. 18-FDG-PET for the assessment of residual masses on CT following treatment of lymphomas. Ann Oncol. 2000;11(Suppl 1):147–50.PubMedCrossRef

52.

de Wit M, Bohuslavizki KH, Buchert R, Bumann D, Clausen M, Hossfeld DK. 18FDG-PET following treatment as valid predictor for disease-free survival in Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2001;12:29–37.PubMedCrossRef

53.

Naumann R, Vaic A, Beuthien-Baumann B, Bredow J, Kropp J, Kittner T, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography in the evaluation of post-treatment residual mass in patients with Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2001;115:793–800.PubMedCrossRef

54.

Weihrauch MR, Re D, Scheidhauer K, Ansen S, Dietlein M, Bischoff S, et al. Thoracic positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for the evaluation of residual mediastinal Hodgkin disease. Blood. 2001;98:2930–4.PubMedCrossRef

55.

Dittmann H, Sokler M, Kollmannsberger C, Dohmen BM, Baumann C, Kopp A, et al. Comparison of 18FDG-PET with CT scans in the evaluation of patients with residual and recurrent Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Oncol Rep. 2001;8:1393–9.PubMed

56.

Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Thomas J, Vandenberghe P, Balzarini J, et al. Can positron emission tomography with [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose after first-line treatment distinguish Hodgkin’s disease patients who need additional therapy from others in whom additional therapy would mean avoidable toxicity? Br J Haematol. 2001;115:272–8.PubMedCrossRef

57.

Hueltenschmidt B, Sautter-Bihl ML, Lang O, Maul FD, Fischer J, Mergenthaler HG, et al. Whole body positron emission tomography in the treatment of Hodgkin disease. Cancer. 2001;91:302–10.PubMedCrossRef

58.

Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Van Steenweghen S, Thomas J, Vandenberghe P, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) after first-line chemotherapy in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: is [18F]FDG-PET a valid alternative to conventional diagnostic methods? J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:414–9.PubMed

59.

Zijlstra JM, Lindauer-van der Werf G, Hoekstra OS, Hooft L, Riphagen, II, Huijgens PC. 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for post-treatment evaluation of malignant lymphoma: a systematic review. Haematologica. 2006;91:522–9.

60.

Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, Ritchie JM, Menda Y, Wooldridge JE, et al. Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4652–61.PubMedCrossRef

61.

Brepoels L, Stroobants S, Verhoef G. PET and PET/CT for response evaluation in lymphoma: current practice and developments. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48:270–82.PubMedCrossRef

62.

Brepoels L, Stroobants S, De Wever W, Spaepen K, Vandenberghe P, Thomas J, et al. Hodgkin lymphoma: response assessment by revised International Workshop Criteria. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48:1539–47.PubMedCrossRef

63.

Picardi M, De Renzo A, Pane F, Nicolai E, Pacelli R, Salvatore M, et al. Randomized comparison of consolidation radiation versus observation in bulky Hodgkin’s lymphoma with post-chemotherapy negative positron emission tomography scans. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48:1721–7.PubMedCrossRef

64.

Kobe C, Dietlein M, Franklin J, Markova J, Lohri A, Amthauer H, et al. Positron emission tomography has a high negative predictive value for progression or early relapse for patients with residual disease after first-line chemotherapy in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2008;112:3989–94.PubMedCrossRef

65.

Yahalom J. Omitting radiotherapy after attaining FDG PET-negative status following chemotherapy alone for Hodgkin lymphoma: a randomized study caveat. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48:1667–9.PubMedCrossRef

66.

Rankin SC. Assessment of response to therapy using conventional imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(Suppl 1):S56–64.PubMedCrossRef

67.

Armitage JO, Weisenburger DD, Hutchins M, Moravec DF, Dowling M, Sorensen S, et al. Chemotherapy for diffuse large-cell lymphoma—rapidly responding patients have more durable remissions. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:160–4.PubMed

68.

Kostakoglu L, Goldsmith SJ, Leonard JP, Christos P, Furman RR, Atasever T, et al. FDG-PET after 1 cycle of therapy predicts outcome in diffuse large cell lymphoma and classic Hodgkin disease. Cancer. 2006;107:2678–87.PubMedCrossRef

69.

Hutchings M, Mikhaeel NG, Fields PA, Nunan T, Timothy AR. Prognostic value of interim FDG-PET after two or three cycles of chemotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2005;16:1160–8.PubMedCrossRef

70.

Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, Pedersen LM, Buhl T, Jurlander J, et al. FDG-PET after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts treatment failure and progression-free survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2006;107:52–9.PubMedCrossRef

71.

Zinzani PL, Tani M, Fanti S, Alinari L, Musuraca G, Marchi E, et al. Early positron emission tomography (PET) restaging: a predictive final response in Hodgkin’s disease patients. Ann Oncol. 2006;17:1296–300.PubMedCrossRef

72.

Gallamini A, Rigacci L, Merli F, Nassi L, Bosi A, Capodanno I, et al. The predictive value of positron emission tomography scanning performed after two courses of standard therapy on treatment outcome in advanced stage Hodgkin’s disease. Haematologica. 2006;91:475–81.PubMed

73.

Markova J, Kobe C, Skopalova M, Klaskova K, Dedeckova K, Plutschow A, et al. FDG-PET for assessment of early treatment response after four cycles of chemotherapy in patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma has a high negative predictive value. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1270–4.PubMedCrossRef

74.

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, Najjar F, Paulus P, Rigo P, et al. Persistent tumor 18F-FDG uptake after a few cycles of polychemotherapy is predictive of treatment failure in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Haematologica. 2000;85:613–8.PubMed

75.

Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Vandenberghe P, Thomas J, de Groot T, et al. Early restaging positron emission tomography with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2002;13:1356–63.PubMedCrossRef

76.

Haioun C, Itti E, Rahmouni A, Brice P, Rain JD, Belhadj K, et al. [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in aggressive lymphoma: an early prognostic tool for predicting patient outcome. Blood. 2005;106:1376–81.PubMedCrossRef

77.

Mikhaeel NG, Hutchings M, Fields PA, O’Doherty MJ, Timothy AR. FDG-PET after two to three cycles of chemotherapy predicts progression-free and overall survival in high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2005;16:1514–23.PubMedCrossRef

78.

Cashen AF, Dehdashti F, Luo J, Homb A, Siegel BA, Bartlett NL. 18F-FDG PET/CT for early response assessment in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: poor predictive value of international harmonization project interpretation. J Nucl Med. 2008;52:386–92.CrossRef

79.

Hasenclever D, Diehl V. A prognostic score for advanced Hodgkin’s disease. International Prognostic Factors Project on Advanced Hodgkin’s Disease. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1506–14.PubMedCrossRef

80.

Solal-Celigny P, Roy P, Colombat P, White J, Armitage JO, Arranz-Saez R, et al. Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index. Blood. 2004;104:1258–65.PubMedCrossRef

81.

A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The International Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Prognostic Factors Project. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:987–94.

82.

Kostakoglu L, Coleman M, Leonard JP, Kuji I, Zoe H, Goldsmith SJ. PET predicts prognosis after 1 cycle of chemotherapy in aggressive lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1018–27.PubMed

83.

Gallamini A, Hutchings M, Rigacci L, Specht L, Merli F, Hansen M, et al. Early interim 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to international prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3746–52.PubMedCrossRef

84.

Romer W, Hanauske AR, Ziegler S, Thodtmann R, Weber W, Fuchs C, et al. Positron emission tomography in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: assessment of chemotherapy with fluorodeoxyglucose. Blood. 1998;91:4464–71.PubMed

85.

Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, O’Doherty MJ, Hain S, Maisey MN. 18-FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in the treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma-comparison with CT. Leuk Lymphoma. 2000;39:543–53.PubMedCrossRef

86.

Lin C, Itti E, Haioun C, Petegnief Y, Luciani A, Dupuis J, et al. Early 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1626–32.PubMedCrossRef

87.

Weber WA. 18F-FDG PET in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: qualitative or quantitative? J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1580–2.PubMedCrossRef

88.

Itti E, Lin C, Dupuis J, Paone G, Capacchione D, Rahmouni A, et al. Prognostic value of interim 18F-FDG PET in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment at 4 cycles of chemotherapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:527–33.PubMedCrossRef

89.

Dupuis J, Itti E, Rahmouni A, Hemery F, Gisselbrecht C, Lin C, et al. Response assessment after an inductive CHOP or CHOP-like regimen with or without rituximab in 103 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: integrating 18fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to the International Workshop Criteria. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:503–7.PubMedCrossRef

90.

Cheson B. The case against heavy PETing. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1742–3.PubMedCrossRef

91.

Casasnovas RO, Meignan M, Berriolo-Riedinger A, Bardet S, Julian A, Thieblemont C, et al. SUVmax reduction improves early prognosis value of interim positron emission tomography scans in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. 2011;118:37–43.PubMedCrossRef

92.

Meignan M, Gallamini A, Haioun C. Report on the First International Workshop on Interim-PET-Scan in Lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2009;50:1257–60.PubMedCrossRef

93.

Aleman BM, van den Belt-Dusebout AW, Klokman WJ, Van’t Veer MB, Bartelink H, van Leeuwen FE. Long-term cause-specific mortality of patients treated for Hodgkin’s disease. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3431–9.PubMedCrossRef

94.

HD16 for early stage Hodgkin lymphoma http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00736320. Accessed May 2011.

95.

Fluoroudeoxyglucose F PET scan-guided therapy or standard therapy in treating patients with previously untreated stage I or stage II Hodgkin’s lymphoma http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00433433. Accessed May 2011.

96.

RAPID: Randomized Trial of Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00282035. Accessed May 2011.

97.

Diehl V, Franklin J, Pfreundschuh M, Lathan B, Paulus U, Hasenclever D, et al. Standard and increased-dose BEACOPP chemotherapy compared with COPP-ABVD for advanced Hodgkin’s disease. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2386–95.PubMedCrossRef

98.

Oza AM, Ganesan TS, Leahy M, Gregory W, Lim J, Dadiotis L, et al. Patterns of survival in patients with Hodgkin’s disease: long follow up in a single centre. Ann Oncol. 1993;4:385–92.PubMed

99.

Positron emission tomography (PET)-adapted chemotherapy in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00795613. Accessed May 2011.

100.

Fluoroudeoxyglucose F PET/CT imaging in assessing response to chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed Stage II, Stage III, or Stage IV Hodgkin lymphoma http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00678327. Accessed May 2011.

101.

High-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation, in patients PET-2 positive, after 2 courses of ABVD and comparison of RT versus no RT in PET-2 negative patients (HD0801) http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00784537. Accessed May 2011.

102.

HD18 for advanced stages in Hodgkins lymphoma http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00515554. Accessed May 2011.

103.

Gallamini A, Viviani S, Bonfante V, et al. Early interim FDG-PET during intensified BEACOPP therapy shows a lower predictive value than during conventional ABVD chemotherapy. Haematologica. 2007;92(Suppl. 5):71.

104.

Avigdor A, Bulvik S, Dann EJ, et al. Combined ESCBEACOPP-ABVD therapy for advanced Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients with high IPS score: an effective regimen and low positive predictive value of early FDG-PET/CT. Haematologica. 2007;92(Suppl. 5):66.

105.

FDG-PET-stratified R-DICEP and R-beam/ASCT for diffuse large b-cell lymphoma (PET Chop) http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00530179. Accessed May 2011.

106.

ACVBP plus rituximab in patients aged from 18 to 59 years with high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00144807. Accessed May 2011.

107.

Tailoring treatment for B Cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma based on PET scan results mid treatment http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00324467. Accessed May 2011.

108.

Fluorodeoxyglucose F positron emission tomography in predicting risk of relapse in patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma who are undergoing combination chemotherapy with or without autologous stem cell or bone marrow transplant http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00238368. Accessed May 2011.

109.

Positron emission tomography guided therapy of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (PETAL) http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00554164. Accessed May 2011.

110.

Yoo C, Lee DH, Kim JE, Jo J, Yoon DH, Sohn BS, et al. Limited role of interim PET/CT in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP. Ann Hematol. 2010;90:797–802.PubMedCrossRef

111.

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, Belhocine T, Hustinx R, Rigo P, et al. Early detection of relapse by whole-body positron emission tomography in the follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s disease. Ann Oncol. 2003;14:123–30.PubMedCrossRef

112.

Zinzani PL, Stefoni V, Tani M, Fanti S, Musuraca G, Castellucci P, et al. Role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the follow-up of lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1781–7.PubMedCrossRef

113.

Lapela M, Leskinen S, Minn HR, Lindholm P, Klemi PJ, Soderstrom KO, et al. Increased glucose metabolism in untreated non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a study with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose. Blood. 1995;86:3522–7.PubMed

114.

Schoder H, Noy A, Gonen M, Weng L, Green D, Erdi YE, et al. Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4643–51.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Impact of FDG-PET/CT in the management of lymphoma
verfasst von: Shingo Baba
Koichiro Abe
Takuro Isoda
Yasuhiro Maruoka
Masayuki Sasaki
Hiroshi Honda
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2011
Verlag: Springer Japan
Erschienen in: Annals of Nuclear Medicine / Ausgabe 10/2011
Print ISSN: 0914-7187
Elektronische ISSN: 1864-6433
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-011-0549-0

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Impact of FDG-PET/CT in the management of lymphoma

Abstract

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2011

Myocardial washout rate of technetium-99m-sestamibi in the chronic phase predicts myocardial damage in patients with previous myocardial infarction

Animal tumor models for PET in drug development

A modified method of 3D-SSP analysis for amyloid PET imaging using [11C]BF-227

The molecular imaging approach to image infections and inflammation by nuclear medicine techniques

Novel algorithm for quantitative assessment of left ventricular dyssynchrony with ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: useful technique for management of cardiac resynchronization therapy

Treatment of autonomously functioning thyroid nodules at a single institution: radioiodine therapy, surgery, and ethanol injection therapy