Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
Volume 39, Issue 3 , Pages 210-232 , May 2009

Monitoring Response to Therapeutic Interventions in Patients With Cancer

  • Ken Herrmann, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Ken Herrmann, MD, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technische Universität München, Ismaningerstr 22, D-81675 Munich, Germany
    • ,
  • Bernd Joachim Krause, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
    • ,
  • Ralph A. Bundschuh, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
    • ,
  • Tobias Dechow, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Internal Medicine III, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
    • ,
  • Markus Schwaiger, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany

References 

  1. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, et al. Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer. 1981;47:207–214
  2. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada). J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–216
  3. Therasse P, Eisenhauer EA, Verweij J. RECIST revisited: A review of validation studies on tumour assessment. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42:1031–1039
  4. Weber WA. Positron emission tomography as an imaging biomarker. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3282–3292
  5. Weber WA, Figlin R. Monitoring cancer treatment with PET/CT: Does it make a difference?. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(suppl 1):36S–44S
  6. Weber WA, Czernin J, Phelps ME, et al. Technology insight: Novel imaging of molecular targets is an emerging area crucial to the development of targeted drugs. Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2008;5:44–54
  7. Hellwig D, Graeter TP, Ukena D, et al. Value of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography after induction therapy of locally advanced bronchogenic carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2004;128:892–899
  8. Mac Manus MP, Hicks RJ, Matthews JP, et al. Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography scanning for response-assessment after radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1285–1292
  9. Weber WA, Petersen V, Schmidt B, et al. Positron emission tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer: Prediction of response to chemotherapy by quantitative assessment of glucose use. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:2651–2657
  10. Wieder HA, Beer AJ, Lordick F, et al. Comparison of changes in tumor metabolic activity and tumor size during chemotherapy of adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:2029–2034
  11. Weber WA, Wieder H. Monitoring chemotherapy and radiotherapy of solid tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33(suppl 1):27–37
  12. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369–1379
  13. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:885–895
  14. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group). Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1773–1782
  15. Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1059–1066
  16. Park KW, Ashlock R, Chang WB, et al. High variation in standardized uptake values among PET systems from different manufacturers. J Nucl Med Meeting Abstracts. 2007;48:185P-a
  17. Beyer T, Antoch G, Muller S, et al. Acquisition protocol considerations for combined PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(suppl 1):25S–35S
  18. Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Pan T, et al. Four-dimensional (4D) PET/CT imaging of the thorax. Med Phys. 2004;31:3179–3186
  19. Pan T, Mawlawi O, Nehmeh SA, et al. Attenuation correction of PET images with respiration-averaged CT images in PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1481–1487
  20. Bundschuh RA, Martinez-Moller A, Essler M, et al. Local motion correction for lung tumours in PET/CT-first results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1981–1988
  21. Kinahan PE, Hasegawa BH, Beyer T. X-ray-based attenuation correction for positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanners. Semin Nucl Med. 2003;33:166–179
  22. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Beyer T, et al. To enhance or not to enhance? (18F-FDG and CT contrast agents in dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT). J Nucl Med. 2004;45(suppl 1):56S–65S
  23. Bundschuh RA, Martinez-Moller A, Ziegler SI, et al. Misalignment in PET/CT: relevance for SUV and therapy management. Nuklearmedizin. 2008;47:N14–N15
  24. Mamede M, Higashi T, Kitaichi M, et al. [18F]FDG uptake and PCNA, Glut-1, and Hexokinase-II expressions in cancers and inflammatory lesions of the lung. Neoplasia. 2005;7:369–379
  25. de Geus-Oei LF, van Krieken JH, Aliredjo RP, et al. Biological correlates of FDG uptake in non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2007;55:79–87
  26. Yen TC, See LC, Lai CH, et al. 18F-FDG uptake in squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix is correlated with glucose transporter 1 expression. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:22–29
  27. Westerterp M, Sloof GW, Hoekstra OS, et al. 18FDG uptake in oesophageal adenocarcinoma: Linking biology and outcome. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2008;134:227–236
  28. Buerkle A, Weber WA. Imaging of tumor glucose utilization with positron emission tomography. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2008;27:545–554
  29. Cullinane C, Dorow DS, Kansara M, et al. An in vivo tumor model exploiting metabolic response as a biomarker for targeted drug development. Cancer Res. 2005;65:9633–9636
  30. Wahl RL, Cody RL, Hutchins GD, et al. Primary and metastatic breast carcinoma: initial clinical evaluation with PET with the radiolabeled glucose analogue 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology. 1991;179:765–770
  31. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: Variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology. 1993;189:847–850
  32. Kim CK, Gupta NC, Chandramouli B, et al. Standardized uptake values of FDG: body surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:164–167
  33. Lammertsma AA, Hoekstra CJ, Giaccone G, et al. How should we analyse FDG PET studies for monitoring tumour response?. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33(suppl 1):16–21
  34. Hoekstra CJ, Hoekstra OS, Stroobants SG, et al. Methods to monitor response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer with 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1304–1309
  35. Leskinen-Kallio S, Nagren K, Lehikoinen P, et al. Carbon-11-methionine and PET is an effective method to image head and neck cancer. J Nucl Med. 1992;33:691–695
  36. Weber WA, Ziegler SI, Thodtmann R, et al. Reproducibility of metabolic measurements in malignant tumors using FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1771–1777
  37. Avril N, Rose CA, Schelling M, et al. Breast imaging with positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: Use and limitations. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:3495–3502
  38. Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, et al. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7445–7453
  39. Ott K, Fink U, Becker K, et al. Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in gastric carcinoma by metabolic imaging: Results of a prospective trial. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:4604–4610
  40. Ott K, Weber WA, Lordick F, et al: Metabolic imaging predicts response, survival, and recurrence in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. J Clin Oncol 24:4692-4698
  41. Ott K, Herrmann K, Lordick F, et al. Early metabolic response evaluation by fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography allows in vivo testing of chemosensitivity in gastric cancer: long-term results of a prospective study. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:2012–2018
  42. Weber WA, Ott K, Becker K, et al. Prediction of response to preoperative chemotherapy in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction by metabolic imaging. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3058–3065
  43. Wieder HA, Brucher BL, Zimmermann F, et al. Time course of tumor metabolic activity during chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and response to treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:900–908
  44. Benz MR, Evilevitch V, len-Auerbach MS, et al. Treatment monitoring by 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with sarcomas: Interobserver variability of quantitative parameters in treatment-induced changes in histopathologically responding and nonresponding tumors. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1038–1046
  45. Weinberg IN, Huang SC, Hoffman EJ, et al. Validation of PET-acquired input functions for cardiac studies. J Nucl Med. 1988;29:241–247
  46. Hoekstra CJ, Hoekstra OS, Lammertsma AA. On the use of image-derived input functions in oncological fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography studies. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:1489–1492
  47. Graham MM, Peterson LM, Hayward RM. Comparison of simplified quantitative analyses of FDG uptake. Nucl Med Biol. 2000;27:647–655
  48. Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1983;3:1–7
  49. Alkhawaldeh K, Bural G, Kumar R, et al. Impact of dual-time-point (18)F-FDG PET imaging and partial volume correction in the assessment of solitary pulmonary nodules. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:246–252
  50. Matthies A, Hickeson M, Cuchiara A, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:871–875
  51. Hoffman EJ, Huang SC, Phelps ME. Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography: 1 (Effect of object size). J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1979;3:299–308
  52. Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:932–945
  53. Rousset O, Rahmim A, Alavi A, et al. Partial volume correction strategies in PET. PET Clinics. 2007;2:235–249
  54. Pottgen C, Levegrun S, Theegarten D, et al. Value of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer for prediction of pathologic response and times to relapse after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:97–106
  55. Hickeson M, Yun M, Matthies A, et al. Use of a corrected standardized uptake value based on the lesion size on CT permits accurate characterization of lung nodules on FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:1639–1647
  56. Becker K, Mueller JD, Schulmacher C, et al. Histomorphology and grading of regression in gastric carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer. 2003;98:1521–1530
  57. Prentice RL. Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: Definition and operational criteria. Stat Med. 1989;8:431–440
  58. Flamen P, Van CE, Lerut A, Cambier JP, et al. Positron emission tomography for assessment of the response to induction radiochemotherapy in locally advanced oesophageal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2002;13:361–368
  59. Diehl V, Fuchs M. Early, intermediate and advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma: Modern treatment strategies. Ann Oncol. 2007;18(suppl 9):ix71–ix79
  60. Schmits R, Schmitz N, Pfreundschuh M. The best treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a German perspective. Oncology (Williston Park). 2005;19(suppl 4):16–25
  61. Franklin J, Pluetschow A, Paus M, et al. Second malignancy risk associated with treatment of Hodgkin's lymphoma: meta-analysis of the randomised trials. Ann Oncol. 2006;17:1749–1760
  62. Diehl V, Behringer K. Could BEACOPP be the new standard for the treatment of advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma?. Cancer Invest. 2006;24:461–465
  63. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:579–586
  64. Facey K, Bradbury I, Laking G, et al. Overview of the clinical effectiveness of positron emission tomography imaging in selected cancers. Health Technol Assess. 2007;11(44):iii-267
  65. Gallamini A, Rigacci L, Merli F, 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;91:475–481
  66. Haioun C, Itti E, Rahmouni A, 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;106:1376–1381
  67. Hutchings M, Eigtved AI, Specht L. FDG-PET in the clinical management of Hodgkin lymphoma. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2004;52:19–32
  68. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, et al. FDG-PET after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts treatment failure and progression-free survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2006;107:52–59
  69. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, 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;85:613–618
  70. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, 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;23:4652–4661
  71. Kostakoglu L, Goldsmith SJ, Leonard JP, et al. FDG-PET after 1 cycle of therapy predicts outcome in diffuse large cell lymphoma and classic Hodgkin disease. Cancer. 2006;107:2678–2687
  72. Mikhaeel NG, Hutchings M, Fields PA, et al. FDG-PET after two to three cycles of chemotherapy predicts progression-free and overall survival in high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2005;16:1514–1523
  73. Romer W, Hanauske AR, Ziegler S, et al. Positron emission tomography in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: Assessment of chemotherapy with fluorodeoxyglucose. Blood. 1998;91:4464–4471
  74. Rosenwald A, Wright G, Chan WC, et al. The use of molecular profiling to predict survival after chemotherapy for diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1937–1947
  75. Seam P, Juweid ME, Cheson BD. The role of FDG-PET scans in patients with lymphoma. Blood. 2007;110(10):3507–3516Nov 15
  76. Solal-Celigny P, Roy P, Colombat P, et al. Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index. Blood. 2004;104:1258–1265
  77. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, et al. Early restaging positron emission tomography with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2002;13:1356–1363
  78. Terasawa T, Nihashi T, Hotta T, et al. 18F-FDG PET for posttherapy assessment of Hodgkin's disease and aggressive Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: A systematic review. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:13–21
  79. Zinzani PL, Tani M, Fanti S, et al. Early positron emission tomography (PET) restaging: A predictive final response in Hodgkin's disease patients. Ann Oncol. 2006;17:1296–1300
  80. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480–508
  81. Kobe C, Dietlein M, Franklin J, 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;112:3989–3994
  82. Jemal A, Travis WD, Tarone RE, et al. Lung cancer rates convergence in young men and women in the United States: Analysis by birth cohort and histologic type. Int J Cancer. 2003;105:101–107
  83. Pirker R, Szczesna A, Von PJ, et al. FLEX: A randomized, multicenter, phase III study of cetuximab in combination with cisplatin/vinorelbine (CV) versus CV alone in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Oncol. 2008;(suppl):26
  84. Herbst RS, Giaccone G, Schiller JH, et al. Gefitinib in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase III trial–INTACT 2. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:785–794
  85. Giaccone G, Herbst RS, Manegold C, et al. Gefitinib in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A phase III trial—INTACT 1. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:777–784
  86. Shepherd FA, Rodrigues PJ, Ciuleanu T, et al. Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:123–132
  87. Hoekstra CJ, Stroobants SG, Smit EF, et al. Prognostic relevance of response evaluation using [18F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in patients with locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8362–8370
  88. de Geus-Oei LF, van der Heijden HF, Visser EP, et al. Chemotherapy response evaluation with 18F-FDG PET in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1592–1598
  89. Dooms C, Verbeken E, Stroobants S, et al. Prognostic stratification of stage IIIA-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer after induction chemotherapy: a model based on the combination of morphometric-pathologic response in mediastinal nodes and primary tumor response on serial 18-fluoro-2-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1128–1134
  90. Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:11–20
  91. Gebski V, Burmeister B, Smithers BM, et al. Survival benefits from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy in oesophageal carcinoma: A meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:226–234
  92. Lordick F, Ott K, Krause BJ, et al. PET to assess early metabolic response and to guide treatment of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction: The MUNICON phase II trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:797–805
  93. Gillham CM, Lucey JA, Keogan M, et al. (18)FDG uptake during induction chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer fails to predict histomorphological tumour response. Br J Cancer. 2006;95:1174–1179
  94. Brucher BL, Weber W, Bauer M, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Ann Surg. 2001;233:300–309
  95. Downey RJ, Akhurst T, Ilson D, et al. Whole body 18FDG-PET and the response of esophageal cancer to induction therapy: Results of a prospective trial. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:428–432
  96. Kim MK, Ryu JS, Kim SB, et al. Value of complete metabolic response by (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in oesophageal cancer for prediction of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43:1385–1391
  97. Port JL, Lee PC, Korst RJ, et al. Positron emission tomographic scanning predicts survival after induction chemotherapy for esophageal carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;84:393–400Aug
  98. Swisher SG, Maish M, Erasmus JJ, et al. Utility of PET, CT, and EUS to identify pathologic responders in esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78:1152–1160
  99. Smithers BM, Couper GC, Thomas JM, et al. Positron emission tomography and pathological evidence of response to neoadjuvant therapy in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Dis Esophagus. 2008;21:151–158
  100. Lordick F, Ruers T, Aust DE, et al. European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Gastrointestinal Group: Workshop on the role of metabolic imaging in the neoadjuvant treatment of gastrointestinal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:1807–1819
  101. Ott K, Lordick F, Herrmann K, et al. The new credo: induction chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer: Consequences for surgical strategies. Gastric Cancer. 2008;11:1–9
  102. Roder JD, Bottcher K, Siewert JR, et al. Prognostic factors in gastric carcinoma (Results of the German Gastric Carcinoma Study 1992). Cancer. 1993;72:2089–2097
  103. Shah MA, Yeung HW, Coit D, et al. A phase II study of preoperative chemotherapy with irinotecan (CPT) and cisplatin (CIS) for gastric cancer (NCI 5917): FDG-PET/CT predicts patient outcome. (abstr) J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4502
  104. Herrmann K, Ott K, Buck AK, et al. Imaging gastric cancer with PET and the radiotracers 18F-FLT and 18F-FDG: A comparative analysis. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1945–1950
  105. Krebs in Deutschland, Häufigkeiten und Trends. In: Berlin, Germany: Robert Koch-Institut; 2008;p. 34–37
  106. Calvo FA, Domper M, Matute R, et al. 18F-FDG positron emission tomography staging and restaging in rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58:528–535
  107. Cascini GL, Avallone A, Delrio P, et al. 18F-FDG PET is an early predictor of pathologic tumor response to preoperative radiochemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1241–1248
  108. de Geus-Oei LF, van Laarhoven HW, Visser EP, et al. Chemotherapy response evaluation with FDG-PET in patients with colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:348–352
  109. Findlay M, Young H, Cunningham D, et al. Noninvasive monitoring of tumor metabolism using fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography in colorectal cancer liver metastases: Correlation with tumor response to fluorouracil. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14:700–708
  110. Funaioli C, Pinto C, Di FF, et al. 18FDG-PET evaluation correlates better than CT with pathological response in a metastatic colon cancer patient treated with bevacizumab-based therapy. Tumori. 2007;93:611–615
  111. Guillem JG, Moore HG, Akhurst T, et al. Sequential preoperative fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography assessment of response to preoperative chemoradiation: a means for determining longterm outcomes of rectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:1–7
  112. Rosenberg R, Herrmann K, Gertler R, et al. The predictive value of metabolic response to preoperative radiochemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer measured by PET/CT. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009;24:191–200
  113. Kelly H, Goldberg RM. Systemic therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer: current options, current evidence. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4553–4560
  114. Chia S, Swain SM, Byrd DR, et al. Locally advanced and inflammatory breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:786–790
  115. Gralow JR, Zujewski JA, Winer E. Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: Reviewing the state of the science and exploring new research directions. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:696–697
  116. Gralow J, Ozols RF, Bajorin DF, et al. Clinical cancer advances 2007: Major research advances in cancer treatment, prevention, and screening—a report from the American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:313–325
  117. Wahl RL, Zasadny K, Helvie M, et al. Metabolic monitoring of breast cancer chemohormonotherapy using positron emission tomography: Initial evaluation. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:2101–2111
  118. Schelling M, Avril N, Nahrig J, et al. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:1689–1695
  119. Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, et al. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose to predict the pathologic response of breast cancer to primary chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:1676–1688
  120. Couturier O, Jerusalem G, N′Guyen JM, et al. Sequential positron emission tomography using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:6437–6443
  121. Dose SJ, Bader M, Jenicke L, et al. Early prediction of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer using sequential 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1144–1150
  122. Gennari A, Donati S, Salvadori B, et al. Role of 2-[18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in the early assessment of response to chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients. Clin Breast Cancer. 2000;1:156–161
  123. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. Posttherapy [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in carcinoma of the cervix: response and outcome. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2167–2171
  124. Schwarz JK, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, et al. Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma. JAMA. 2007;298:2289–2295
  125. Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Kanenishi K, et al. Monitoring the neoadjuvant therapy response in gynecological cancer patients using FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:287–295
  126. Strobel K, Dummer R, Steinert HC, et al. Chemotherapy response assessment in stage IV melanoma patients-comparison of (18)F-FDG-PET/CT, CT, brain MRI, and tumormarker S-100B. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1786–1795
  127. Strobel K, Skalsky J, Steinert HC, et al. S-100B and FDG-PET/CT in therapy response assessment of melanoma patients. Dermatology. 2007;215:192–201
  128. Brun E, Kjellen E, Tennvall J, et al. FDG PET studies during treatment: prediction of therapy outcome in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck. 2002;24:127–135
  129. Kunkel M, Forster GJ, Reichert TE, et al. Radiation response non-invasively imaged by [18F]FDG-PET predicts local tumor control and survival in advanced oral squamous cell carcinoma. Oral Oncol. 2003;39:170–177
  130. Connell CA, Corry J, Milner AD, et al. Clinical impact of, and prognostic stratification by, F-18 FDG PET/CT in head and neck mucosal squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck. 2007;29:986–995
  131. Stroobants S, Goeminne J, Seegers M, et al. 18FDG-Positron emission tomography for the early prediction of response in advanced soft tissue sarcoma treated with imatinib mesylate (Glivec). Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:2012–2020
  132. Gayed I, Vu T, Iyer R, et al. The role of 18F-FDG PET in staging and early prediction of response to therapy of recurrent gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:17–21
  133. Antoch G, Kanja J, Bauer S, et al. Comparison of PET, CT, and dual-modality PET/CT imaging for monitoring of imatinib (STI571) therapy in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:357–365
  134. Goerres GW, Stupp R, Barghouth G, et al. The value of PET, CT and in-line PET/CT in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumours: Long-term outcome of treatment with imatinib mesylate. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:153–162
  135. Holdsworth CH, Badawi RD, Manola JB, et al. CT and PET: early prognostic indicators of response to imatinib mesylate in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:W324–W330
  136. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, et al. Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1753–1759
  137. Schulte M, Brecht-Krauss D, Werner M, et al. Evaluation of neoadjuvant therapy response of osteogenic sarcoma using FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1637–1643
  138. Schuetze SM, Rubin BP, Vernon C, et al. Use of positron emission tomography in localized extremity soft tissue sarcoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Cancer. 2005;103:339–348
  139. Jones DN, McCowage GB, Sostman HD, et al. Monitoring of neoadjuvant therapy response of soft-tissue and musculoskeletal sarcoma using fluorine-18-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:1438–1444
  140. Hawkins DS, Schuetze SM, Butrynski JE, et al. [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts outcome for Ewing sarcoma family of tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:8828–8834
  141. Hawkins DS, Rajendran JG, Conrad EU, et al. Evaluation of chemotherapy response in pediatric bone sarcomas by [F-18]-fluorodeoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography. Cancer. 2002;94:3277–3284
  142. Franzius C, Drup-Link HE, Sciuk J, et al. FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: Comparison with spiral CT. Ann Oncol. 2001;12:479–486
  143. Franzius C, Sciuk J, Brinkschmidt C, et al. Evaluation of chemotherapy response in primary bone tumors with F-18 FDG positron emission tomography compared with histologically assessed tumor necrosis. Clin Nucl Med. 2000;25:874–881
  144. Evilevitch V, Weber WA, Tap WD, et al. Reduction of glucose metabolic activity is more accurate than change in size at predicting histopathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy in high-grade soft-tissue sarcomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:715–720
  145. Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:496–507
  146. Shreve PD, Anzai Y, Wahl RL. Pitfalls in oncologic diagnosis with FDG PET imaging: physiologic and benign variants. Radiographics. 1999;19:61–77
  147. Kubota R, Kubota K, Yamada S, et al. Microautoradiographic study for the differentiation of intratumoral macrophages, granulation tissues and cancer cells by the dynamics of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:104–112
  148. Wells P, Gunn RN, Alison M, et al. Assessment of proliferation in vivo using 2-[(11)C]thymidine positron emission tomography in advanced intra-abdominal malignancies. Cancer Res. 2002;62:5698–5702
  149. Shields AF, Grierson JR, Dohmen BM, et al. Imaging proliferation in vivo with [F-18]FLT and positron emission tomography. Nat Med. 1998;4:1334–1336
  150. Machulla HJ, Blocher A, Kuntzsch M, et al. Simplified labeling approach for synthesizing 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine ([18F]FLT). J Radioanal Nucl Chem. 2000;243:843–846
  151. Rasey JS, Grierson JR, Wiens LW, et al. Validation of FLT uptake as a measure of thymidine kinase-1 activity in A549 carcinoma cells. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1210–1217
  152. Barthel H, Perumal M, Latigo J, et al. The uptake of 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine into L5178Y tumours in vivo is dependent on thymidine kinase 1 protein levels. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:257–263
  153. Wagner M, Seitz U, Buck A, et al. 3′-[18F]fluoro-3′-deoxythymidine ([18F]-FLT) as positron emission tomography tracer for imaging proliferation in a murine B-cell lymphoma model and in the human disease. Cancer Res. 2003;63:2681–2687
  154. Perumal M, Pillai RG, Barthel H, et al. Redistribution of nucleoside transporters to the cell membrane provides a novel approach for imaging thymidylate synthase inhibition by positron emission tomography. Cancer Res. 2006;66:8558–8564
  155. Been LB, Elsinga PH, de Vries J, et al. Positron emission tomography in patients with breast cancer using (18)F-3′-deoxy-3′-fluoro-l-thymidine ((18)F-FLT)-a pilot study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:39–43
  156. Smyczek-Gargya B, Fersis N, Dittmann H, et al. PET with [18F]fluorothymidine for imaging of primary breast cancer: A pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31(5):720–724
  157. van Westreenen HL, Cobben DC, Jager PL, et al. Comparison of 18F-FLT PET and 18F-FDG PET in esophageal cancer. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:400–404
  158. Francis DL, Visvikis D, Costa DC, et al. Potential impact of [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine versus [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in positron emission tomography for colorectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;3:988–994
  159. Herrmann K, Eckel F, Schmidt S, et al. In vivo characterization of proliferation for discriminating cancer from pancreatic pseudotumors. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1437–1444
  160. Buck AK, Hetzel M, Schirrmeister H, et al. Clinical relevance of imaging proliferative activity in lung nodules. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:525–533
  161. Dittmann H, Dohmen BM, Paulsen F, et al. [18F]FLT PET for diagnosis and staging of thoracic tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(10):1407–1412
  162. Tian J, Yang X, Yu L, et al. A multicenter clinical trial on the diagnostic value of dual-tracer PET/CT in pulmonary lesions using 3′-deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine and 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:186–194
  163. Yamamoto Y, Nishiyama Y, Ishikawa S, et al. Correlation of 18F-FLT and 18F-FDG uptake on PET with Ki-67 immunohistochemistry in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1610–1616
  164. Yap CS, Czernin J, Fishbein MC, et al. Evaluation of thoracic tumors with 18F-fluorothymidine and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. Chest. 2006;129:393–401
  165. Chen W, Cloughesy T, Kamdar N, et al. Imaging proliferation in brain tumors with 18F-FLT PET: comparison with 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:945–952
  166. Choi SJ, Kim JS, Kim JH, et al. [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine PET for the diagnosis and grading of brain tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:653–659
  167. Cobben DC, Jager PL, Elsinga PH, et al. 3′-18F-fluoro-3′-deoxy-L-thymidine: A new tracer for staging metastatic melanoma?. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1927–1932
  168. Cobben DC, van der Laan BF, Maas B, et al. 18F-FLT PET for visualization of laryngeal cancer: Comparison with 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:226–231
  169. Troost EG, Vogel WV, Merkx MA, et al. 18F-FLT PET does not discriminate between reactive and metastatic lymph nodes in primary head and neck cancer patients. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:726–735
  170. Buck AK, Herrmann K, Buschenfelde CM, et al. Imaging bone and soft tissue tumors with the proliferation marker [18F]Fluorodeoxythymidine. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:2970–2977
  171. Cobben DC, Elsinga PH, Suurmeijer AJ, et al. Detection and grading of soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities with (18)F-3′-fluoro-3′-deoxy-L-thymidine. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:1685–1690
  172. Salskov A, Tammisetti VS, Grierson J, et al. FLT: Measuring tumor cell proliferation in vivo with positron emission tomography and 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine. Semin Nucl Med. 2007;37:429–439
  173. Pio BS, Park CK, Pietras R, et al. Usefulness of 3′-[F-18]fluoro-3′-deoxythymidine with positron emission tomography in predicting breast cancer response to therapy. Mol Imaging Biol. 2006;8:36–42
  174. Kenny L, Coombes RC, Vigushin DM, et al. Imaging early changes in proliferation at 1 week post chemotherapy: A pilot study in breast cancer patients with 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine positron emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1339–1347
  175. Herrmann K, Wieder HA, Buck AK, et al. Early response assessment using 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography in high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13:3552–3558
  176. Chen W, Delaloye S, Silverman DH, et al. Predicting treatment response of malignant gliomas to bevacizumab and irinotecan by imaging proliferation with [18F] fluorothymidine positron emission tomography: A pilot study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(30):4714–4721
  177. Been LB, Suurmeijer AJ, Elsinga PH, et al. 18F-fluorodeoxythymidine PET for evaluating the response to hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion for locally advanced soft-tissue sarcomas. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:367–372
  178. Grierson JR, Link JM, Mathis CA, et al. A radiosynthesis of fluorine-18 fluoromisonidazole. J Nucl Med. 1989;30:343–350
  179. Krause BJ, Beck R, Souvatzoglou M, Piert M. PET and PET/CT studies of tumor tissue oxygenation. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;50:28–43Mar
  180. Lee ST, Scott AM. Hypoxia positron emission tomography imaging with 18f-fluoromisonidazole. Semin Nucl Med. 2007;37:451–461
  181. Gronroos T, Eskola O, Lehtio K, et al. Pharmacokinetics of [18F]FETNIM: a potential marker for PET. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1397–1404
  182. Yang DJ, Wallace S, Cherif A, et al. Development of F-18-labeled fluoroerythronitroimidazole as a PET agent for imaging tumor hypoxia. Radiology. 1995;194:795–800
  183. Souvatzoglou M, Grosu AL, Roper B, et al. Tumour hypoxia imaging with [18F]FAZA PET in head and neck cancer patients: A pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1566–1575
  184. Rajendran JG, Wilson DC, Conrad EU, et al. [(18)F]FMISO and [(18)F]FDG PET imaging in soft tissue sarcomas: Correlation of hypoxia, metabolism and VEGF expression. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:695–704
  185. Koh WJ, Bergman KS, Rasey JS, et al. Evaluation of oxygenation status during fractionated radiotherapy in human nonsmall cell lung cancers using [F-18]fluoromisonidazole positron emission tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;33:391–398
  186. Hicks RJ, Rischin D, Fisher R, et al. Utility of FMISO PET in advanced head and neck cancer treated with chemoradiation incorporating a hypoxia-targeting chemotherapy agent. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1384–1391
  187. Gagel B, Reinartz P, Demirel C, et al. [18F] fluoromisonidazole and [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in response evaluation after chemo-/radiotherapy of non-small-cell lung cancer: a feasibility study. BMC Cancer. 2006;6:51

PII: S0001-2998(08)00137-2

doi: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2008.12.001

Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
Volume 39, Issue 3 , Pages 210-232 , May 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution