|Year : 2010 | Volume
| Issue : 2 | Page : 100-119
Clinical applications of positron emission tomography-computed tomography in oncology
R Kumar, D Halanaik, A Malhotra
Department of Nuclear Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
|Date of Web Publication||5-May-2010|
Department of Nuclear Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
Positron emission computed tomography (PET) is a functional diagnostic imaging technique, which can accurately measure in vivo distribution of a variety of radiopharmaceuticals. The ability of PET to study various biological processes (glucose, amino acid, phospholipids, receptors etc.) opens up new possibilities for both day-to-day clinical use and research applications in the practice of oncology. Addition of CT to PET has resulted in better specificity and sensitivity than either of the modalities alone, as the combined approach has the ability to demonstrate functional and structural details in the same setting. F-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG), an analogue of glucose, is the most commonly used radiotracer in PET-CT imaging. The F-18 FDG uptake in tumor cells is directly proportional to glucose metabolism in the cells. Since glucose metabolism is increased several folds in the malignant tumors, PET-CT images show preferential higher FDG uptake in malignant cells as compared to normal cells. F-18 FDG PET-CT has been found to be useful in the initial staging, detection of recurrent disease and monitoring the response to the therapy in malignancies including lung cancer, colorectal cancer, lymphoma, melanoma, esophageal cancer, head and neck cancer, breast cancer.
Keywords: Fluorodeoxyglucose, oncology, positron emission tomography - computed tomography
|How to cite this article:|
Kumar R, Halanaik D, Malhotra A. Clinical applications of positron emission tomography-computed tomography in oncology. Indian J Cancer 2010;47:100-19
| » Introduction|| |
Positron emission computed tomography (PET) is a functional diagnostic imaging technique, which has ability to study various biological processes like glucose, amino acid, phospholipids, receptors etc. Addition of CT to PET has shown better specificity and sensitivity than either PET or CT alone as it has the ability to demonstrate functional and structural details in the same setting. The main objectives of oncologic imaging are lesion detection, lesion characterization, evaluation of the extent of the tumor, initial staging, assessment of the treatment response and detection of recurrent disease. The most widely used radiotracer in PET for this purpose is Fluorine18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), which is an analogue of glucose. The uptake of FDG is mediated by a family of structurally related glucose transporter proteins (GLUT receptors) present on cell membrane.  Subsequently, it is phosphorylated by the enzyme hexokinase to FDG-6-phosphate. ,, However, FDG-6-phosphate is biochemically trapped within the cell since it is not a substrate for glucose-6-phosphate isomerase.
PET-CT have a very high sensitivity and a high negative predictive value for lesion detection as compared to conventional morphological modalities like computed tomography (CT), ultrasonography (USG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The role of PET has been already established in initial staging, monitoring the response to the therapy and recurrence detection of various important cancers. Recent data show that PET-CT has higher sensitivity and specificity as compared to PET and CT alone as it provides better characterization and localization of lesion. Unfortunately, FDG is not a cancer specific agent and its uptake has been described in a number of non-neoplastic inflammatory lesions like sarcoidosis, tuberculosis, fungal infection and abscesses. , The applications of PET and PET-CT in major malignancies will be discussed in this review.
| » Normal Biodistribution of FDG and its Variants|| |
It is always important to know the normal biodistribution and variants for the correct interpretation of any imaging modality. Therefore, it is also important to know the normal distribution of FDG for correct interpretation of PET-CT. Tensing muscles are one of the common sites of physiological FDG uptake. Patients undergoing PET/PET-CT scan, hence, should be advised to refrain from exercise, chewing and talking before and immediately after injection of F-18 FDG. Muscle uptake can also be noted in patients who fasted less than four hours. The uptake is generally symmetrical but sometimes can be asymmetrical, especially in torticollis, after surgery and unilateral paralysis. Mild sedation may be needed in anxious patients to avoid skeletal muscle uptake. In our experience, oral administration of single dose of 40 mg of beta blocker one hour before FDG injection is also effective in reducing muscle uptake. Brown fat also shows intense FDG uptake and usually presents as bilateral symmetrical uptake [Figure 1]. Sometimes it is difficult to interpret normal asymmetrical FDG uptake in muscles and brown fat with PET alone. However, with the PET-CT, uptake in muscles and brown fat rarely pose difficulty in interpretation.
FDG uptake in the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) is variable and is mainly due to smooth muscle activity associated with peristalsis, uptake in mucosa and normal bacterial flora of intestine. In addition, PET-CT shows increased FDG uptake because of overestimation of activity in view of the collapsed wall of the colon. There can be normal mild FDG activity in the esophagus, possibly due to swallowed saliva or smooth muscle metabolism. Stomach is usually seen and there can be intense FDG uptake in the pyloric end of stomach due to contraction (hunger pains). Uptake in the cecum and right colon is usually higher than in other colonic segments. In our experience, modified technique called PET-CT enteroclysis, wherein intestine is inflated with oral ingestion of polyethylene glycol, is useful. Due to dilatation GIT, it is easy to differentiate between physiological and abnormal FDG uptake. Unlike glucose, FDG is not totally reabsorbed in the kidneys and activity in the urinary tract may interfere with the interpretation of malignant tumors arising from kidneys, ureters, urinary bladder, cervix, ovary etc. Improvement in imaging can be made using intravenous lasix and proper hyderation. Glandular breasts show moderate activity, especially in premenopausal women and in women taking estrogen pills. This may obscure potential lesions in the breast. Uptake in the bone marrow, spleen and other reticuloendothelial organs may be significant after therapy with colony stimulating factors. Lymphoid tissues in head and neck also show increased FDG uptake which usually symmetrical.
| » Standardized Uptake Value|| |
In addition to qualitative image display, it is possible to quantify specific uptake value normalized to the injected dose, which is called "standardized uptake value" (SUV). The SUV provides an approximate indicator that correlates with FDG metabolism in the tissue. During the initial years, a SUV of 2.5 was considered by many as a cutoff value to differentiate between benign and malignant diseases. An abnormality with SUV more than 2.5 used to was considered malignant. However, learning with time, it is now not valid in the practice of PET. In countries where the incidence of infectious and inflammatory disease is higher, this cutoff value of 2.5 does not work. In our experience, many a time, significantly higher SUVs were noted in infection and inflammation.
| » Clinical Applications|| |
Solitary Pulmonary Nodule
Conventional imaging modalities such as chest radiography and CT have secured an essential role in solitary pulmonary nodules. , Based on various imaging patterns, CT can often differentiate benign and malignant conditions. However, on many occasion, these techniques cannot differentiate the two conditions. Chest MRI has been used in the evaluation of lung masses as well, but this technique is suboptimal.  FDG PET and PET-CT can provide additional information and have been successfully used as non-invasive diagnostic tests for solitary pulmonary nodules (SPN) in order to differentiate benign lesions from malignancy.  In one study, 56 patients were evaluated for SPN with FDG PET/CT, of which 26 were true positive, five false positive, 24 true negative and one false negative. In this study, the presence of any FDG avidity was more sensitive than semi quantitative analysis for malignancy. 
False Positive : Most benign pulmonary nodules do not accumulate FDG. However, active granulomatous infections like tuberculosis, sarcoidosis, histoplasmosis or coccidioidomycosis can demonstrate increased FDG uptake. Recent studies have shown better results with delayed PET images taken several hours after FDG injection (dual time point imaging), along with routine one-hour imaging protocol. These studies conclude that malignant nodules show increased FDG uptake over time, while pulmonary nodules of benign origin have a declining pattern of uptake with time. 
False Negative : Low-grade tumors like bronchoalveolar cell carcinoma and bronchial carcinoid, may not show increased FDG uptake on dedicated PET/ PET-CT scans. , In addition, very small lesions (less than 5 mm) can be missed on PET and PET-CT as scanning is done without breath holding, these lesions show lower SUVs due to partial volume effect. 
As of today, CT is the imaging modality of choice to define the extent of the primary tumor and to assess the tumor involvement of the pleural surfaces and the thoracic wall.  Mediastinoscopy, CT and MRI are being used for assessing the involvement of lymph nodes. Barring thoracotomy, mediastinoscopy is considered the gold standard for lymph node staging. However, it is an invasive procedure and is also prone to under-coverage and sampling errors. , The main limitation of CT and MRI is using a size criterion of 1 cm for the diagnosis of tumor involvement. Since FDG-PET imaging depends on increased metabolism of the malignant cells, it can be used successfully in order to differentiate malignant nodes from others. However, sometimes, infectious and inflammatory lymph nodes also show increased FDG.
A vast majority of the FDG-PET studies for lung cancer have been done in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in whom regional and distant involvement of the disease will change staging and guide the therapeutic approach. Combined PET-CT scan is very useful in providing the relevant information regarding local tumor extension as well as distant metastatic lesions [Figure 2]. The presence of FDG uptake in the pleural space is a bad prognostic sign compared to benign effusion. , Whole body PET-CT scan is very useful as it covers the most common sites of metastatic disease, e.g. lung, liver, brain, adrenals, and bone etc. FDG PET/CT study was conducted in 42 patients with clinicoradiological suspicion of recurrence in carcinoma lung patients. Twenty-four of the 27 patients were true positive, 14/15 patients had true negative with sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV), fairly superior compared to alone PET or CT.  Overall, PET/CT is able to detect the disease at both local as well as distant sites, which may not be apparent by standard imaging strategies in 10-14% of cases and, therefore, can change management in many patients. , FDG-PET can eliminate the need for biopsy of enlarged adrenal glands in lung cancer patients and found to have more than 90% accuracy for adrenal involvement. ,
FDG-PET also has a role in the assessment of prognosis and treatment in lung cancer patients.  FDG PET/CT performed after one cycle of chemotherapy in 36 patients with advanced or metastatic lung cancer shows there was early detection of progressive disease compared to conventional imaging modalities. Thus unnecessary systemic chemotherapy can be avoided in this group of patients.  Cost-effectiveness has been a major concern in PET imaging. Some studies have looked into the cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in staging non-small cell lung cancer. These studies conclude that elective use of FDG-PET imaging makes it a feasible, safe and cost saving adjunct to the preoperative staging of NSCLC. 
Colorectal carcinoma is the third most common malignancy in both men and women and the third leading cause of all cancer deaths. Colonoscopy followed by biopsy remains the corner stone in the diagnosis of colorectal carcinoma. Preoperative staging, with imaging modalities, is usually limited because the extent of the disease can be evaluated during surgery and most patients will benefit from colectomy to prevent intestinal obstruction. Although the sensitivity of FDG-PET for the preoperative diagnosis of colorectal carcinoma is high, in practice, it has no important role since surgical diagnosis and staging will be needed for all patients. However, PET/CT may be advocated in a group of patients who show inconclusive metastatic lesions on CT [Figure 3]. Three systematic reviews analyzed up to 32 studies which were conducted up to 2004. The most recently published systematic review reported that for extra hepatic lesions, the sensitivity and specificity of FDG PET were 92% and 95%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of CT for extra hepatic lesions were 61% and 91%, respectively. When data were pooled from the six studies that had the highest quality scores, the sensitivity and specificity of PET for extra hepatic lesions were 91% and 98%, respectively. For CT, sensitivity and specificity were 55% and 96%. PET resulted in a change in clinical management 32% (range, 20%-58%) of the time in 13 studies. In the six studies with the highest quality scores, the mean change in management was 25% (range, 20%-32%).  PET/CT with dedicated CT protocols such as contrast enhanced PET/CT and PET/CT colonography may replace the diagnostic CT in pre-operative staging.
FDG-PET is found to be superior to CT for the identification of liver metastases. FDG PET/CT, CECT and MRI were compared in a study for colorectal liver metastases in 65 patients. PET/CT was superior to CECT in detecting unexpected liver metastases and extra hepatic lesions. However, MRI was superior for small liver metastases.  FDG-PET has also been investigated for evaluation of treatment response. FDG PET/CT was performed in 40 patients with advanced colorectal cancer to evaluate prognosis and neoadjuvant chemotherapy response. Delta SUV Max (absolute SUV Max.change) and response index (RI, percent SUV Max.change) were best predictive parameters in response evaluation. 
So far, CT has been commonly used to localize the site of possible recurrence which has lower sensitivity and specificity. A meta-analysis of 11 clinical reports and 577 patients determined that the sensitivity and specificity of FDG-PET in detecting recurrent colorectal cancer were 97% and 76% respectively.  PET/CT is superior to contrast enhanced CT for the detection of recurrent intrahepatic tumors after hepatectomy, extra hepatic metastases, and local recurrence at the site of the initial colorectal surgery  [Figure 4].
False Positive: Patients with fistulas, abscesses, diverticulitis and, less frequently, adenomas can cause false positive results and should be kept in mind while reporting PET and PET-CT scan.
False Negative: Normal physiological activity in the intestine can obscure intestinal lesion with PET. However, with PET-CT there is improvement in detection of intestinal lesions. Mucinous adenocarcinoma and microscopic lymph node metastasis can cause false negative results in up to 20% of patients.
Breast cancer is the commonest cancer in Europe and USA and second commonest malignancy in India. Mammography is the most commonly used imaging technique for the diagnosis of primary tumor but has lower sensitivity in women with radiographically dense breasts and patients with breast implants.  MR imaging and US have limited value in differentiating benign abnormalities from malignancies.  FDG-PET and PET-CT play a very important role in the work up of breast cancer  [Figure 5]. Though dense breasts show increased FDG uptake as compared to non-dense breast tissue, it does not effect the detection of the primary tumor in patients with dense breasts.  Dedicated PET breast imaging devices are being developed and may become clinically more important.
Metastasis to axillary lymph nodes is one of the most important prognostic factors in breast cancer patients. Even though FDG-PET can detect axillary node involvement, it has been shown to have limitations in detecting lymph node metastasis when compared to sentinel lymph node biopsy. , However, a clearly positive FDG-PET in select patients with a high risk of nodal metastases carries high positive predictive value and may identify patients with evidence of nodal metastases. This could indicate the need for standard axillary nodal dissection and therapeutic approaches, rather than SLN biopsy. One study compared the diagnostic accuracy of all in one protocol of PET/CT mammography and whole body PET/CT with MR mammography and multimodality imaging algorithms in initial staging of 40 patients with breast cancer. It revealed that there was similar accuracy for PET/CT mammography and MR mammography in primary breast lesion and axillary lymph nodes detection. Only PET/CT detected extra axillary lymphnodal lesions and distant metastatic lesions seen with 100% sensitivity compared to 70% for multimodality algorithm [Figure 6]. 
In assessing residual tumor after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy, FDG-PET and PET-CT has been reported to detect metabolic changes in breast cancer much earlier than conventional imaging and clinical examination after initiation of chemotherapy. ,, Stafford et al. used serial FDG-PET to evaluate the response of skeletal metastases to therapy and demonstrated strong correlation between the quantitative change in SUV and overall clinical assessment of response and change in tumor markers.  Locoregional and distant metastasis occurs in up to 35% of patients of breast cancer within 10 years of initial surgery.  Whole body PET/ PET-CT has emerged as a sensitive and noninvasive technique in the management of breast cancer. FDG PET/CT has superior sensitivity and specificity compared to alone PET and diagnostic contrast enhanced CT for lesion detection in suspected recurrent breast cancer patients.  However, in detecting bone metastasis variable degrees of sensitivity and specificity have been reported.  PET has a limited role in detecting bone metastasis in the skull due to high uptake in the brain. The combination of FDG-PET scan and bone scan can be used for better sensitivity and specificity for bone metastases in these patients.
False Positive: Benign breast diseases like abscesses, tuberculosis, and fungal infections can be metabolically active resulting in false positive PET/PET-CT findings. Post surgical inflammatory changes can also cause false positive results due to higher FDG uptake.
False Negative: Patients with carcinoma, in situ, low-grade tumors, well differentiated ductal and lobular breast cancer, usually have significantly lower small unilamellar vesicles (SUVs) and can be misinterpreted as benign lesions. In addition, smaller lesions (<5 mm) can be missed by PET/PET-CT images as they have lower SUVs due to partial volume effect. Axillary lymph nodes with micrometastsis and macrometastsis (smaller number of tumor cells) usually have false negative results.
FDG-PET/ PET-CT is emerging as a powerful imaging modality for diagnosis, staging, and treatment monitoring of lymphoma patients. , All histological types of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) can be successfully imaged with FDG-PET, with no significant difference in SUV among different sites and grades of disease both in Hodgkin's disease (HD) and aggressive NHL [Figure 7].  For some subtypes of low-grade lymphoma (follicular, small lymphocytic and probably mantle cell lymphoma), the routine use of PET is still an issue that needs further evaluation.
FDG PET/PET-CT can detect more lesions than CT and may lead to a change in the stage of up to 15% of patients. , A number of studies have assessed the value of PET in the diagnosis of extra nodal involvement like bone marrow, osseous, gastrointestinal and splenic involvement, which may be present in 10-25% of newly diagnosed patients of lymphoma , [Figure 8]. Another major advantage of FDG-PET/CT is that since it is a whole body imaging method, it can guide for the biopsy or histopathological examination from suitable and easily accessible site.
Approximately two-thirds of patients with HD and 50% of patients with NHL show persistent mass lesion on morphological imaging modalities after treatment, however FDG PET/CT shows absence metabolic activity in these lesions and lower incidence of relapse in these group of patients [Figure 9].  FDG-PET is very efficient and the precise fusion of morphologic and metabolic imaging data using hybrid PET-CT systems is useful for the management of a residual mass after therapy of lymphoma. 
False Positive: Benign inflammatory/infective diseases show increased lymph node uptake and cause false positive PET/PET-CT results. Post surgical/radiotherapy/chemotherapy inflammatory changes can also cause false positive results due to higher FDG uptake. Therefore, it is advisable to wait for six to eight weeks after these interventions. Postchemotherapy bone marrow stimulation can result in high SUV in bone marrow and cause difficulty in interpretation.
False Negative: Low-grade lymphoma (small lymphocytic and probably mantle cell lymphoma), follicular lymphoma and CNS lymphoma can cause false negative results. Lymph nodes with smaller number of tumor cells especially after completion of chemotherapy can cause false negative results in up to 20% of cases.
Head and Neck Cancer
Head and neck cancer is the most common type of cancer in India. Unfortunately, at the time of initial presentation, most of the patients (45%) present with regional nodes or even distant metastases. Patients with cervical lymph node metastasis from an unknown primary tumor present a big diagnostic dilemma. , It is suggested that these patients undergo thorough examination and investigations to find out the primary site and treat accordingly. FDG-PET and PET-CT can be valuable tools in this subset of patients with an occult primary tumor in the head and neck region, as early identification of the primary tumor may allow more accurate tumor staging and targeted radiotherapy.
Lymph node metastasis in head and neck tumors is associated with poor prognosis. Accurate pre therapy lymph node staging is essential for therapeutic planning. FDG PET/CT has clear potential to affect patient management compared to PET alone and conventional morphological imaging like CT/MRI and avoids unnecessary neck surgery [Figure 10].  Many authors have compared and showed better accuracy of FDG-PET/PET-CT over anatomic imaging modalities for the detection of nodal metastases in the neck.  FDG PET/CT provides high diagnostic accuracy of 100% compared to 28% alone for CT for residual disease, when performed eight weeks after the conclusion of radiation therapy.  A positive scan obtained at least six weeks after the end of therapy suggests residual disease, unless there are clinical signs of inflammation/infection to explain the abnormalities on PET. FDG-PET/ PET-CT are also more sensitive and specific in detecting residual and recurrent lymph node metastasis. PET/CT can be used in prognostic stratification and has significant clinical impact on management [Figure 11]. In a study by Connell CA on 76 patients, the complete metabolic response was predictive of overall survival; it changed radiotherapy planning technique in 29% and altered TNM staging in 34% of the patients. 
The role of FDG-PET/CT in thyroid cancer should also be stressed. In the evaluation of thyroid incidentalomas, in a large series of patients, it was proven that diffuse thyroid FDG uptake is usually an indicator of chronic thyroiditis. In contrast, focal FDG activity in the thyroid gland has been associated with malignancy.  FDG-PET/CT may not be a substitute for I-123 or I-131 whole-body scintigraphy in the evaluation of metastatic or recurrent thyroid cancer. However, in patients with increased thyroglobulin levels and negative I-123 or I-131 scan, especially under TSH stimulation, the utility of FDG-PET/CT scan has been confirmed in several studies, and the sensitivity of FDG-PET in detecting metastases in these cases ranges from 71% to 94%. ,, In patients with medullary thyroid cancer somatostatin receptor scintigraphy may be more sensitive than FDG-PET. However, when fluorine-18 dihydroxyphenylalanine or 8F-DOPA is used, the results are very impressive.  In this study, it was shown that for lymph node staging the sensitivity was 63% for fluorine-18 dihydroxyphenylalanine PET, 44% for FDG-PET, and 52% for somatostatin receptor scintigraphy. Schwartz et al. demonstrated the excellent role of PET/CT in intensity modulated head and neck radiotherapy, where it can selectively target and intensify the treatment of head and neck cancer while reducing critical normal tissue doses. 
False Positive: Benign inflammatory/infective diseases show increased lymph node uptake and cause false positive PET/PET-CT results.
False Negative: Head and Neck cancers are usually low-grade tumors and cause false negative results.
There is no defined role for FDG-PET and PET-CT in the initial diagnosis of melanoma.  PET is of limited use in patients with early-stage disease without nodal or distant metastases (stage I-II), and sentinel node biopsy is much more sensitive in detecting microscopic lymph node metastases. Recent studies have proved the same with a lower sensitivity as compared to sentinel lymph node biopsy.  Lymphoscintigraphy and intraoperative mapping with a gamma probe is a better procedure for localizing and dissecting SLN in patients with malignant melanoma.  However, melanoma metastasizes very widely (to skin, muscle, bone, bowel, myocardium, omentum, leptomeninges, mesentry etc). FDG-PET/CT shows a high tumor-to-background ratio and is therefore useful in this situation as it can highlight metastases at unusual sites that are easily missed with conventional imaging modalities.  The accuracy of PET in detecting melanoma metastasis ranges from 81-100%.  FDG-PET/CT is also more accurate than conventional imaging in restaging and follow-up. Iagaru et al. showed that PET/CT has 89% sensitivity and 88% specificity for melanoma lesion detection during restaging, especially in high risk patients. 
False Negative: PET/PET-CT has limited value for early diagnosis (stage I-II) of the disease. PET is relatively insensitive as compared to SLN biopsy for detection of early nodal disease.
Gastric and Esophageal Cancer
FDG PET/CT is sensitive tool for the staging and restaging of primary gastric and esophageal cancers [Figure 12].  However, the identification of regional nodal metastases has been restricted due to the small volume of disease in some lymph nodes. FDG PET/CT is more specific than CT and endoscopic US for loco-regional lymph node metastasis and response evaluation to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with esophageal carcinoma.  FDG-PET changed the management in more than 20% of cases.  Therefore PET is reliable in differentiating resectable and non-resectable disease and avoids many unnecessary surgeries. FDG-PET/CT is more accurate than CT in detection of gastric cancer recurrence after initial surgical resection. Among 23 patients, CT was negative or did not provide definitive information in 11 patients and PET/CT was true positive in all those 11 patients. 
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with inflammatory/infective diseases of esophagus and stomach.
False Negative: PET/PET-CT has limited value for detection of LNs, which are very close to the primary lesion due to a very high uptake in primary and early nodal disease.
Diagnostic imaging has played a major role in the evaluation of patients with cancers of bone and soft tissue. MRI is used to define the local extent of osteosarcoma in bone and soft tissue. However, signal abnormalities caused by peritumoral edema can result in an overestimation of tumor extension. FDG-PET and PET-CT may play an important role in determining the metabolic rates of osteosarcoma, guiding biopsy, detecting local recurrence in amputation stumps, evaluating patients with suspected metastatic disease, monitoring response to therapy and assessing for prognosis and differentiating viable sarcoma from post treatment changes. ,
FDG uptake in osteosarcoma has a good correlation with histological grading or tumor aggressiveness. Bastiaannet and coworkers conducted a meta-analysis of 29 clinical studies on the diagnostic value of FDG-PET in the detection, grading, and therapy response of soft tissue and bone sarcomas.  Eary et al. reported in a meta-analysis of 209 patients that baseline SUV could predict outcome in a better way than conventional grading.  FDG-PET scan also guides biopsy to the most active tumor metabolic site. Lucas et al. showed that FDG detected more lesions as compared to CT and MRI. 
In multiple myeloma, bone scan shows marrow involvement indirectly by imaging cortical bone osteoblastic reaction to the marrow tumor while FDG-PET shows marrow involvement directly. Jadvar et al. concluded that FDG-PET could detect early marrow involvement as compared to bone scan and other conventional imaging modalities. PET is also useful in assessing the response to treatment. 
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with acute and chronic osteomyelitis, fractures, trauma, benign bone tumors and bone marrow stimulation.
False Negative: PET/PET-CT has limited value for detection low grade primary bone tumors, lymph nodes which are very close to primary bone tumors due to very high uptake in primary and early nodal disease.
In two-third of patients, ovarian carcinoma is at an advanced stage at the time of presentation and is one of the deadliest and the most difficult of all gynecologic cancers to control. In patients with ovarian cancer, early lesion localization is difficult with PET alone. However, FDG-PET/CT has high sensitivity and specificity in identifying patients with recurrent tumor. ,
Accurate staging is very important for proper management, especially in patients with raised serum CA-125. FDG-PET/CT has shown high sensitivity and specificity as compared to conventional imaging modalities in detecting lymph node metastases. However, like other imaging modalities, it has a limited role in micro metastases and very small lesions [Figure 13].  Despite this limitation, other studies have suggested that not only the diagnosis of recurrent disease based on PET and PET-CT precedes by the other conventional procedures (median six months) but also that a negative PET scan during the follow-up period after the primary treatment predicts longer relapse free interval than a positive PET scan does. FDG-PET has also been found to be cost-effective in the therapeutic management of patients with ovarian cancer. 
In one study, diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET/CT was compared with transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS), CECT and histology for ovarian lesion characterization and staging of the disease. PET/CT gave additional value to TVUS for lesion characterization as benign or malignant and PET/CT was superior in staging providing additional lesion sites, compared to CECT.  There are recent encouraging reports on the utility of combined PET-CT imaging systems for localizing and differentiating pathologic activity from physiologic activity in women with recurrent ovarian carcinoma. , PET/CT has been evaluated in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Bristow et al. evaluated combined PET/CT imaging in 22 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and rising serum CA-125 levels after primary therapy and negative or equivocal conventional imaging.  Overall patient-based sensitivity and accuracy of PET/CT in detecting recurrent disease ≥1 cm was 81.8%, with a sensitivity of 83.3% and PPV of 93.8%.
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with inflammatory/infective abdominal diseases. Physiological activity in gastrointestinal tract can also cause misinterpretation.
False Negative: PET/PET-CT shows low uptake in mucinous cyst adenocarcinoma. It also has limited value for detection of micrometastases and very small lesions.
Invasive cancer of the cervix is the second most common genital malignancy in women, worldwide. The applications of PET/CT in cervical cancer patients include: assessing metabolic tumor activity and possible endometrial involvement, evaluating pelvic nodal involvement (even in cases with negative CT or MRI studies), detection of distant metastases where it can be used as a first imaging technique, radiation therapy planning of metabolically active lymph nodal lesions, identification of persistent/recurrent disease following neoadjuvant therapy and prognostication in terms of response-survival relationship. ,
Many studies have evaluated the role of FDG-PET in primary staging of cervical cancer and showed a variable sensitivity and specificity. , A recent meta-analysis by Havrilesky et al. demonstrated a combined pooled sensitivity and specificity of 84% and 95%, respectively, for aortic node metastases, while similar values for pelvic node metastases were 79% and 99%, respectively.  For recurrent tumor, pooled sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG PET were 96% and 81%, respectively. Delayed imaging with FDG-PET can be helpful in extracting more information from FDG-PET. Ma et al. evaluated dual-time point imaging at 40-minute and three-hour intervals.  The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of FDG PET at 40-minute interval were 81.6%, 97.0%, and 91.3%, respectively; and all values increased to 100%, when both the 40-minute and three-hour scans were taken together.
Recent study by Kim et al. compared the value of PET/MRI and PET/CT in detecting lymphonodal recurrence in patients with cervical cancer. PET/MRI detected more additional lesions compared to PET/CT.  PET/CT also is a good metabolic imaging modality and can prognosticate patients with recurrent cervix cancer [Figure 14]. Increased uptake (SUV) is directly related to poor prognosis.  The negative predictive value of PET/CT is very high during restaging of patients especially for para aortic lymph nodal recurrence.  Sofue et al. evaluated the role of carbon-11 choline PET/CT in the management of uterine carcinoma in 22 patients, of which five patients were also available for treatment response assessment. They found that carbon-11 choline PET/CT was good for tumor, nodal and metastatic saging, as well as SUV reduction was remarkable in five patients after receiving treatment. 
FDG-PET has been evaluated for treatment planning in cervical cancer patients. Grigsby et al. evaluated patients with cervical cancer and negative lymph nodes diagnosed by FDG-PET.  Sixty-five patients were studied in two groups, one that was treated with irradiation (RT) and concurrent chemotherapy and second with RT alone. The five-year overall survival estimate was 81% with RT and concurrent chemotherapy and 85% with RT alone. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), guided by PET/CT has been evaluated. Esthappan et al. studied PET/CT guided IMRT for para-aortic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer para-aortic metastasis. 
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with infected fibroid, cervicitis and other inflammatory/infective pathologies. Increased FDG uptake is also noted during menstrual cycle.
False Negative: PET/PET-CT has limited value in detection of primary cervical cancer in early stages and disease activity in pelvic LNs.
FDG-PET/CT has been extensively evaluated for pancreatic cancer in initial staging and restaging as well as primary pancreatic mass diagnosis. ,, FDG-PET/CT in pancreatic cancer is mainly indicated for staging by detecting CT-occult metastases, detecting recurrence, and monitoring therapy and for the diagnosis in patients with suspected pancreatic cancer in equivocal CT or non-diagnostic FNAs.  An important aspect in pancreatic imaging is differentiation of pancreatic cancer and benign lesions especially in patients of chronic pancreatitis. Nitzsche et al. evaluated non-invasive differentiation between pancreatic cancer and chronic pancreatitis using FDG-PET.  They found that dynamic FDG PET study, including kinetic analysis, yields more accurate results than semi quantitative analysis of pancreatic lesions. Sperti et al. studied the role of FDG-PET in differentiating malignant from benign cystic lesions.  In detecting malignancy in cystic lesions, the accuracy of FDG-PET was 94% and was clearly superior to conventional CT (accuracy 80%). In the present scenario, FDG-PET is considered as a complementary study in pancreatic cancer, especially when CT is non-diagnostic.
FDG-PET/CT may reveal unsuspected metastases to the liver, bones and lungs, thereby changing the management protocol. FDG-PET/CT has been shown to be an effective imaging modality in detecting occult distant metastasis in patients with pancreatic cancer and thus changing patient management.  In a recent study by Farm JM, PET/CT had sensitivity of 87% for metastatic lesion detection and changed management in 11% of the patients by detecting occult lesions not detected by CT alone.  In a study by Tang et al, FDG PET/CT and endoscopic ultrasound was compared for the diagnosis of primary pancreatic carcinoma. FDG PET/CT was more sensitive and endoscopic ultrasound was more specific for the primary diagnosis of pancreatic cancer.  One pilot study compared the value of FLT PET/CT and FDG PET/CT in primary pancreatic cancer diagnosis in five patients. FLT PET/CT showed localized in only two of five patients with low SUV and FDG was positive in all patients with high SUV.  FDG-PET shows markedly reduced uptake early after the treatment, when there was no definite change in tumor size on CT. 
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with acute and chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cyst.
False Negative: False-negative findings are note in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes, mucinous adenocarcinoma, neuroendocrine tumors of pancreas.
The role of FDG-PET/CT is limited in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). It is mainly indicated in patients with moderately or poorly differentiated HCC, tumors >5 cm, or with markedly elevated AFP levels. , Owing to the variable activity of the enzyme glucose-6-phosphatase in the hepatocytes in patients with HCC, there is a varying degree of accumulation of FDG. Consequently, FDG-PET imaging can have three different patterns, namely higher uptake, equivocal uptake and lower uptake, compared to normal liver background [Figure 15]. Khan et al. demonstrated lower sensitivity of FDG-PET in the diagnosis of HCC than CT.  They also found that well differentiated and low-grade liver tumors had lower FDG uptake. Most recurrences in HCC are intrahepatic. However, 30% of the recurrences are extra hepatic. The role of resection in intrahepatic recurrences is widely accepted. The role of resection in extra hepatic HCC recurrence and metastasis is not well established. FDG PET/CT appears to be useful in detecting distant metastasis as well as portal vein invasion and thus has impact on management.  The FDG uptake in HCC has been correlated well with prognosis. Higher SUVs are associated with poor prognosis.
Recently, C11-Acetate has been studied as a radiotracer for PET imaging in patients with HCC. , Park et al. found that C11-acetate successfully detected well-differentiated HCC, while the poorly differentiated HCCs were efficiently detected by F18-FDG. Patients who were positive on FDG PET/CT had overall lower survival rate compared to 11C-acetate. 11C-Acetate and FDG PET/CT were complementary in primary disease detection, however no significant change seen in extra hepatic metastatic lesion detection.  11C-acetate had a sensitivity of 87.3% for detection of HCC in patients with localized disease and ≤3 lesions, which was clearly superior to FDG-PET (sensitivity 47.3%) in the same group of patients. In patients with diffuse or multifocal diseases, the two imaging modalities were complementary to each other in majority of the cases.
False Positive: Liver abscess and inflammatory/infective liver diseases leads to false positive results.
False Negative: PET/PET-CT shows variable FDG uptake due to glucose-6-phosphatase enzyme in the hepatocytes in liver diseases and tumor grading.
Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors
Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GISTs) are a subset of mesenchymal tumors of the gastrointestinal tract, occurring in the stomach in 70% of cases. CT scanning is the imaging modality of choice in GISTs, which can locate a mass lesion, contiguous organ invasion and distant metastases. FDG-PET/CT in GISTs is being used widely since the introduction of imatinib mesylate. As FDG-PET is a functional imaging study, it may be expected to be useful in rapid evaluation of response to imatinib. It may show significant drop in FDG uptake early after imatinib therapy, while on conventional anatomical imaging, tumor size may remain constant for an indefinite period of time. FDG-PET/CT improves staging, accurately separates responders from non-responders in an early stage, and is helpful during follow-up. Several studies have shown superiority of FDG-PET over conventional imaging modalities in determining response to therapy in patients with GISTs. , Kamiyama et al. evaluated the role of FDG-PET in predicting the malignant potential of gastric stromal tumors before surgery.  They found a significant correlation between FDG uptake and the mitotic index, indicating the value of FDG-PET in predicting malignant potential in these patients.
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with inflammatory/infective abdominal diseases. Physiological activity in gastrointestinal tract can also cause misinterpretation.
The most effective screening tools for prostate cancer are digital rectal examination (DRE) and serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) monitoring. The role of FDG-PET in prostate cancer localized within the gland is limited owing to low metabolic behavior shown by this tumor and urinary excretion of FDG.  It is also not very useful in differentiating hypertrophy from cancer, a major obstacle in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. , Oyama et al. found FDG-PET to be an insensitive method to detect prostate cancer.  However, FDG uptake correlates well with PSA levels as a measure of tumor size, advanced tumor or PSA relapse.  11C-choline PET/CT has variable results for recurrent or residual disease localization. Reske et al. did 11C-choline PET/CT on 49 patients with biochemical evidence of recurrence and found 71% sensitive for local recurrence and all patients showed biochemical response following local treatment. 
In detecting soft-tissue metastasis to pelvic lymph nodes, FDG-PET has a limited role, owing to urinary excretion of FDG through kidneys and low glucose metabolism by tumor cells.  Shreve et al. compared FDG-PET imaging with CT scan and bone scintigraphy.  They found that pelvic lymph node detection was severely limited by bladder activity and streak artifacts. In osseous metastasis too, the use of FDG-PET is limited. However, PET-CT is very useful and can demonstrate sclerotic bone metastases [Figure 16]. A recent study by Garcia compares 11C-choline and FDG PET/CT in 38 surgically operated patients; 11C-choline appeared to be significantly more sensitive than FDG imaging in detecting recurrence at prostate bed, pelvic lymph nodes as well as for distant metastases. Sensitivity of 11C-choline was progressively increased with the increase in the PSA levels.  However, FDG-PET can be useful when conventional imaging methods like bone scanning, show equivocal or negative results, especially in progressively metastatic tumors. We feel that bone scan and PET are complimentary modalities for the detection of bone metastases in these patients.
The role of FDG-PET/CT in bladder cancer is evolving and very limited work has been done in the recent past. Urinary excretion of FDG and streak artifacts from excreted tracer in the bladder has contributed to the limited value of FDG-PET in bladder cancer for the primary tumor localization.  However, it can be useful if special views are obtained. We have introduced special technique for such patients [Figure 17]. In a recent prospective study, Kibel et al. did FDG PET/CT in 43 patients for initial staging before cystectomy and all had negative CT and bone scintigraphy. FDG-PET/CT demonstrated a positive predictive value of 78%, a negative predictive value of 91%, sensitivity of 70%, and specificity of 94%. Recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival and overall survival were all significantly poorer in the patients with positive FDG-PET/CT than in those with negative FDG-PET/CT.  De Jong et al. have tried a new radiotracer 11C-choline with PET, in patients with bladder cancer.  They found avid uptake of choline in bladder cancer with virtual absence of urinary radioactivity, while there was no uptake in pre-malignant lesions or small non-invasive tumors.
As the excretory route of FDG is mainly renal, the role of FDG-PET is chiefly in metastatic renal cancer to evaluate the other sites of disease. Studies have shown wide variability in characterization and staging of renal cell carcinoma, with sensitivities ranging from 40% to 100%.  Diuresis has been suggested to increase the contrast between the tumor and background renal tissue.  However, no significant correlation was found between diuretic use and improvement of the FDG-PET sensitivity. Kang et al. evaluated 66 patients with renal cancer and found that PET detected primary renal tumors with a sensitivity of 60% and specificity of 100%.  In a recent work, Kumar et al. studied the role of FDG-PET in solid renal masses.  In this study, FDG-PET accurately detected 85% (23 of 27) of malignant renal lesions. Studies have shown a complimentary role of FDG-PET to the conventional imaging methods, in detecting distant metastasis [Figure 18]. PET/CT has promising results for assessment of sumitinib treatment response in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. In one study by Vercellino et al. PET/CT was used to assess the metabolic response of sunitinib an antiangiogenic agent in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. 
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with infective/inflammatory diseases.
False Negative: PET/PET-CT has limited value in detection of primary prostatic and renal malignancies in early stages and disease activity in pelvic LNs, due physiological excretion of FDG through kidneys in to urinary bladder.
Among urological tumors, FDG-PET is most useful in testicular cancers, especially in defining recurrent and residual masses and in patients with raised markers. Many authors have evaluated the role of FDG-PET for initial staging and produced variable results. ,,, Tsatalpas et al. compare PET and CT in 32 patients with testicular cancer.  Though not statistically significant, FDG-PET was found superior to CT scan in detecting metastatic infradiaphragmatic and supradiaphragmatic lesions. In a recent study, Lassen et al. studied the role of FDG-PET in Stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumors, with normal findings on conventional imaging.  FDG-PET was superior to conventional imaging modalities, with sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, NPV and PPV of 70%, 100%, 93%, 92% and 100% respectively. FDG-PET has been evaluated for its role in testicular tumor recurrence or relapse.  De Santis et al. evaluated residual testicular tumor with FDG-PET.  They found that all residual lesions more than 3 cm and 96% of lesions less than or equal to 3 cm were correctly predicted by FDG PET. In their recent work, Becherer et al. find that in post-chemotherapy residual seminomas the specificity of PET was significantly higher than that of CT when using a ≥ 3 cm cutoff [Figure 19].  Therefore, FDG-PET may contribute to the management plan of residual seminoma lesions, as it can avoid unnecessary additional treatment, especially when tumor size is ≥ 3 cm.
Functional imaging has a great role in neuroendocrine tumors as it targets the molecular characteristics of endocrine tumors. The role of PET in neuroendocrine tumors is continuously and rapidly increasing as a complementary and valuable diagnostic tool, particularly when other imaging modalities have failed.  However, as opposed to other malignancies where FDG is the most commonly used positron-emitting radiotracer for PET imaging, in NET, other positron-emitting radionuclides, are more successfully employed. These include 11C-Hydroxyephedrine, 11C-Epinephrine, 11C-5-hydroxytryptophan, 18F-DOPA, 68 gallium-DOTA TOC and DOTA NOC. 
Pheochromocytomas and Paragangliomas
FDG-PET has been used in phaeochromocytoma as an adjunct to other imaging modalities. FDG-PET helps in localizing majority of the pheochromocytomas as most of these tumors accumulate FDG. However, FDG-PET has been described to have lower sensitivity and also lower specificity due to accumulation of glucose by a variety of other neoplastic and non-neoplastic processes.  Studies have found 18F-DOPA whole-body PET to be highly sensitive and specific for detection of pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas and monitoring the response to therapy; , 18F-DOPA-PET also helps in detecting metastasis from malignant pheochromocytomas, especially when used after negative MIBG study. , Trampal et al. studied the role of 11C-hydroxyephedrine-PET in pheochromocytomas and found it to be highly sensitive and specific.  We have performed 68 Gallium68- DOTA TOC and DOTA NOC PET-CT in these patients and found encouraging results [Figure 20]. We feel that PET, MIBG and Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy have a complimentary role in the management of these tumors.
Carcinoid tumors are difficult to diagnose in earlier stages because of their small size and low proliferation rate. CT is mainly used for characterizing and staging of the tumor. Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS) is the functional imaging study used for detection and staging of carcinoid tumors. Unfortunately, the role of FDG-PET is limited in carcinoid tumors due to their low proliferative activity and high differentiation rate.  Therefore, other PET radiotracers like F18-DOPA and C11-labeled 5-HTP have been studied, which are specifically directed towards the carcinoid tumors.  Hoegerle et al. studied the role of F18-DOPA in gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors in a series of 17 patients. They found PET to be a promising procedure and a useful supplement to morphologic methods in diagnostic imaging of gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors.  Various studies have shown promising results of 68 gallium-DOTA TOC and DOTA NOC in bronchial and gastrointestinal carcinoids. , We feel that PET, MIBG and Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy have a complimentary role in the management of these tumors.
Tumors of the adrenal cortex may present with Cushing's syndrome, feminization, virilization, hyperaldosteronism (hypertension), hypoglycemia, mixed hormone excess syndrome or sometimes, with no recognizable features. The diagnosis depends upon the level of hormonal metabolites in blood/urine and localization of adrenal mass on CT/MRI. Functional studies, e.g. adrenocortical scintigraphy, mostly use radiopharmaceuticals, which are analogs of cholesterol, thereby, acting as a substrate for adrenal steroid hormone synthesis. FDG-PET is a useful functional imaging modality for detection of primary adrenocortical cancer and metastatic lesions. , FDG-PET has been shown to have excellent diagnostic performance (sensitivity 93% and specificity 90%) in differentiating adrenal lesions detected on CT or MRI in patients with known malignancies.  FDG PET has the additional advantage of evaluating primary lesions as well as metastases. ,, Recently, C11-Etomidate and C11-metomidate have been used effectively as tracers in PET imaging to distinguish adrenocortical tumor from metastatic cancer based on targeting of specific enzyme (11ί-hydroxylase) involved in cortisol and aldosterone synthesis. , However, this does not allow differentiation of benign from malignant adrenocortical lesions.
The role of FDG-PET in brain tumors is chiefly in gliomas, the most frequently occurring primary brain tumors. FDG-PET is basically a measure of glucose uptake and mainly utilized for grading tumors, distinguishing tumor from necrosis, or other post-radiation effects.  Increased FDG uptake has been correlated with tumor grade, tumor cell density, biological aggressiveness, and survival of patients in primary as well as recurrent gliomas. , However, studies have demonstrated diagnostic limitations of FDG PET for imaging brain tumors, mainly due to difficulty in characterizing tumors in the brain, owing to high glucose uptake of normal brain tissue. Spence et al. evaluated whether distinction between tumor and normal gray matter is improved by delayed imaging and found that tumor enhancement was greater than enhancement of surrounding brain regions at later imaging times. 
New radiotracers like C11-methionine (C11-MET), C11-tyrosine, F18-fluoro-tyrosine, F18-fluoroethyl-tyrosine (F18-FET), 8-cyclopentyl-3-(3-18F-fluoropropyl)-1-propylxanthine (F18-CPFPX) and F18-fluoro-thymidine (F18-FLT) have been studied for PET imaging in brain tumors. ,, These new agents are different from the traditional FDG in that the normal brain uptake of these compounds is lower than that of the FDG. MET-PET was particularly useful for low-grade gliomas. Dysembryoplastic neuroepithelial tumors mainly associated with longstanding epilepsy, show normal MET-PET uptake in majority of the cases, while other tumors like gliomas or gangliogliomas show moderate or high MET uptake. 
Other newer radiotracers have also been used to characterize primary brain tumors and have a promising role in the future. 18F-FLT-PET and F18-CPFPX-PET have been specifically used to image cellular proliferation in brain tumors.  F18-FET-PET has been evaluated in characterizing brain tumors. , Pauleit et al. demonstrated that sensitivity and specificity of MRI changed from 96% and 53%, respectively to 93% and 94%, respectively, when combined with FET-PET. 
False Positive: PET/PET-CT has false positive results in patients with infective/inflammatory brain diseases.
False Negative: PET/PET-CT has limited value in detection of low and moderate grade primary brain tumors due physiological FDG uptake in brain.
| » References|| |
|1.||Mochizuki T, Tsukamoto E, Kuge Y, Kanegae K, Zhao S, Hikosaka K, et al. FDG uptake and glucose transporter subtype expressions in experimental tumor and inflammation models. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1551-5. |
|2.||McGowan KM, Long SD, Pekala PH. Glucose transporter gene expression: Regulation of transcription and mRNA stability. Pharmacol Ther 1995;66:465-505. |
|3.||Delbeke D. Oncological applications of FDG PET imaging: Brain tumors, colorectal cancer, lymphoma, and melanoma. J Nucl Med 1999;40:591-603. |
|4.||Avril N, Menzel M, Dose J, Schelling M, Weber W, Jδnicke F, et al. Glucose metabolism of breast cancer assessed by 18F-FDG PET: Histologic and immunohistochemical tissue analysis. J Nucl Med 2001;42:9-16. |
|5.||Larson SM. Cancer or inflammation? A holy grail for nuclear medicine. J Nucl Med 1994;35:1653-5. |
|6.||Konishi J, Yamazaki K, Tsukamoto E, Tamaki N, Onodera Y, Otake T, et al. Mediastinal lymph node staging by FDG-PET in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Analysis of false-positive FDG-PET findings. Respiration 2003;70:500-6. |
|7.||Mavi A, Lakhani P, Zhuang H, Gupta NC, Alavi A. Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET in characterizing solitary pulmonary nodules, assessing pleural diseases, and the initial staging, restaging, therapy planning, and monitoring response of lung cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43:1-21. |
|8.||Acker MR, Burrell SC. Utility of 18F-FDG PET in evaluating cancers of lung. J Nucl Med Technol 2005;33:69-74. |
|9.||Haberkorn U, Schoenberg SO. Imaging of lung cancer with CT, MRI and PET. Lung Cancer 2001;34:S13-23. |
|10.||Gould MK, Maclean CC, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, Owens DK. Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions: A meta-analysis. JAMA 2001;285:914-24. |
|11.||Bar-Shalom R, Kagna O, Israel O, Guralnik L. Noninvasive diagnosis of solitary pulmonary lesions in cancer patients based on 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose avidity on positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Cancer 2008;113:3213-21. |
|12.||Alkhawaldeh K, Bural G, Kumar R, Alavi A. 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;35:246-52. |
|13.||Kim BT, Kim Y, Lee KS, Yoon SB, Cheon EM, Kwon OJ, et al. Localized form of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma: FDG PET findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;170:935-9. |
|14.||Erasmus JJ, McAdams HP, Patz EF Jr, Coleman RE, Ahuja V, Goodman PC. Evaluation of primary pulmonary carcinoid tumors using positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;170:1369-73. |
|15.||Webb WR, Golden JA. Imaging strategies in the staging of lung cancer. Clin Chest Med 1991;12:133-50. |
|16.||Van Schil PE, Van Hee RH, Schoofs EL. The value of mediastinoscopy in preoperative staging of bronchogenic carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1989;97:240-4. |
|17.||Patterson GA, Ginsberg RJ, Poon PY, Cooper JD, Goldberg M, Jones D, et al. A prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and mediastinoscopy in the preoperative assessment of mediastinal node status in bronchogenic carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1987;94:679-84. |
|18.||Erasmus JJ, McAdams HP, Rossi SE, Goodman PC, Coleman RE, Patz EF. FDG PET of pleural effusions in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000;175:245-9. |
|19.||Gupta NC, Rogers JS, Graeber GM, Gregory JL, Waheed U, Mullet D, et al. Clinical role of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in patients with lung cancer and suspected malignant pleural effusion. Chest 2002;122:1918-24. |
|20.||Keidar Z, Haim N, Guralnik L, Wollner M, Bar-Shalom R, Ben-Nun A, et al. PET/CT using 18F-FDG in suspected lung cancer recurrence: Diagnostic value and impact on patient management. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1640-6. |
|21.||Cerfolio RJ, Ojha B, Bryant AS, Raghuveer V, Mountz JM, Bartolucci AA. The accuracy of integrated PET-CT compared with dedicated PEt alone for the staging of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78:1017-23. |
|22.||Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B,et al. Staging of non-small cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2500-7. |
|23.||Kumar R, Xiu Y, Yu JQ, Takalkar A, El-Haddad G, Potenta S, et al. 18F-FDG PET in evaluation of adrenal lesions in patients with lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2004;45:2058-62. |
|24.||Lamki LM. Positron emission tomography, bronchogenic carcinoma, and the adrenals. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168:1361-2. |
|25.||Lee DH, Kim SK, Lee HY, Lee SY, Park SH, Kim HY, et al. Early prediction of response to first-line therapy using integrated 18F-FDG PET/CT for patients with advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2009;4:816-21. |
|26.||Nahmias C, Hanna WT, Wahl LM, Long MJ, Hubner KF, Townsend DW. Time course of early response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients with 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2007;48:744-51. |
|27.||Kelly RF, Tran T, Holmstrom A, Murar J, Segurola RJ Jr. Accuracy and cost-effectiveness of [18F]-2-fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography scan in potentially resectable non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 2004;125:1413-23. |
|28.||Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med 2008;49:480-508. |
|29.||Kong G, Jackson C, Koh DM, Lewington V, Sharma B, Brown G, et al. The use of 18F-FDG PET/CT in colorectal liver metastases--comparison with CT and liver MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1323-9. |
|30.||Capirci C, Rampin L, Erba PA, Galeotti F, Crepaldi G, Banti E, et al. Sequential FDG-PET/CT reliably predicts response of locally advanced rectal cancer to neo-adjuvant chemo-radiation therapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:1583-93. |
|31.||Huebner RH, Park KC, Shepherd JE, Schwimmer J, Czernin J, Phelps ME, et al. A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET detection of colorectal cancer. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1177-89. |
|32.||Selzner M, Hany TF, Wildbrett P, McCormack L, Kadry Z, Clavien PA. Does the novel PET/CT imaging modality impact on the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver? Ann Surg 2004;240:1027-36. |
|33.||Rosenberg RD, Hunt WC, Williamson MR, Gilliland FD, Wiest PW, Kelsey CA, et al. Effects of age, breast density, ethnicity, and estrogen replacement therapy on screening mammographic sensitivity and cancer stage at diagnosis: Review of 183,134 screening mammograms in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Radiology 1998;209:511-8. |
|34.||Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165-75. |
|35.||Kumar R, Alavi A. Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET in the management of breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:1113-22. |
|36.||Kumar R, Chauhan A, Zhuang H, Chandra P, Schnall M, Alavi A. Stanadarized upatke value in normal breast: Effect of age, density and menopausal status. Mol Imaging Biol 2006;8:355-62. |
|37.||Lovrics PJ, Chen V, Coates G, Cornacchi SD, Goldsmith CH, Law C, et al. A prospective evaluation of positron emission tomography scanning, sentinel lymph node biopsy, and standard axillary dissection for axillary staging in patients with early stage breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2004;11:846-53. |
|38.||Kumar R, Zhuang H, Schnall M, Conant E, Damia S, Weinstein S, et al. FDG-PET positive lymph nodes are highly predictive of metastasis in breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27:231-6. |
|39.||Heusner TA, Kuemmel S, Umutlu L, Koeninger A, Freudenberg LS, Hauth EA, et al. Breast cancer staging in a single session: Whole-body PET/CT mammography. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1215-22. |
|40.||Schelling M, Avril N, Nδhrig J, Kuhn W, Rφmer W, Sattler D, et al. Positron emission tomography using [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose for monitoring primary chemotherapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:1689-95. |
|41.||Smith IC, Welch AE, Hutcheon AW, Miller ID, Payne S, Chilcott F, 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;18:1676-88. |
|42.||Kumar A, Kumar R, Seenu V, Gupta SD, Chawla M, Malhotra A, et al. Role of 18F-FDG PET-CT in evaluation of early response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2009;19:1347-57. |
|43.||Stafford SE, Gralow JR, Schubert EK, Rinn KJ, Dunnwald LK, Livingston RB, et al. Use of serial FDG PET to measure the response of bone-dominant breast cancer to therapy. Acad Radiol 2002;9:913-21. |
|44.||Wahl RL. Current status of breast cancer imaging, staging and therapy. Semin Roentgenol 2001;36:250-60. |
|45.||Dirisamer A, Halpern BS, Flφry D, Wolf F, Beheshti M, Mayerhoefer ME, et al. Integrated contrast-enhanced diagnostic whole-body PET/CT as a first-line restaging modality in patients with suspected metastatic recurrence of breast cancer. Eur J Radiol 2010;73:294-9. |
|46.||Eubank WB, Mankoff DA, Vesselle HJ, Eary JF, Schubert EK, Dunnwald LK, et al. Detection of locoregional and distant recurrences in breast cancer patients by using FDG PET. Radiographics 2002;22:5-17. |
|47.||Hines-Thomas M, Kaste SC, Hudson MM, Howard SC, Liu WA, Wu J, et al. Comparison of gallium and PET scans at diagnosis and follow-up of pediatric patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2008;51:198-203. |
|48.||Kumar R, Maillard I, Schuster SJ, Alavi A. Utility of fluorodeoxyglucose-PET imaging in the management of patients with Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:1083-100. |
|49.||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. |
|50.||Radan L, Fischer D, Bar-Shalom R, Dann EJ, Epelbaum R, Haim N, et al. FDG avidity and PET/CT patterns in primary gastric lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1424-30. |
|51.||Shulkin BL, Goodin GS, McCarville MB, Kaste SC, Krasin MJ, Hudson MM, et al. Bone and [(18)F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography scanning for the assessment of osseous involvement in Hodgkin lymphoma in children and young adults. Leuk Lymphoma 2009;50:1794-802. |
|52.||Kumar R, Xiu Y, Potenta S, Mavi A, Zhuang H, Yu JQ, et al. FDG-PET in evaluation of treatment response in patients with gastrointestinal tract lymphomas. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1796-803. |
|53.||Zhao J, Qiao W, Wang C, Wang T, Xing Y. Therapeutic evaluation and prognostic value of interim hybrid PET/CT with (18) F-FDG after three to four cycles of chemotherapy in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Hematology 2007;12:423-30. |
|54.||Paolini R, Rampin L, Rodella E, Ramazzina E, Banti E, Al-Nahhas A, et al. The prognostic value of 18F-FDG PET-CT in the management of Hodgkin's lymphoma: Preliminary results of a prospective study. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur 2007;10:87-90. |
|55.||Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, Gaitini D, Frenkel A, Kuten A, et al. Clinical performance of PET-CT in evaluation of cancer. Additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1200-9. |
|56.||Freudenberg LS, Fischer M, Antoch G, Jentzen W, Gutzeit A, Rosenbaum SJ, et al. Dual modality of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with cervical carcinoma of unknown primary. Med Princ Pract 2005;14:155-60. |
|57.||Jeong HS, Baek CH, Son YI, Ki Chung M, Kyung Lee D, Young Choi J, et al. Use of integrated 18F-FDG PET/CT to improve the accuracy of initial cervical nodal evaluation in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Head Neck 2007;29:203-10. |
|58.||Schφder H, Yeung HW, Gonen M, Kraus D, Larson SM. Head and neck cancer: Clinical usefulness and accuracy of PET/CT image fusion. Radiology 2004;231:65-72. |
|59.||Andrade RS, Heron DE, Degirmenci B, Filho PA, Branstetter BF, Seethala RR, et al. Post treatment assessment of response using FDG-PET/CT for patients treated with definitive radiation therapy for head and neck cancers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:1315-22. |
|60.||Connell CA, Corry J, Milner AD, Hogg A, Hicks RJ, Rischin D, 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;29:986-95. |
|61.||Chen W, Parsons M, Torigian DA, Zhuang H, Alavi A. Evaluation of thyroid FDG uptake incidentally identified on FDG-PET/CT imaging. Nucl Med Commun 2009;30:240-4. |
|62.||Dong MJ, Liu ZF, Zhao K, Ruan LX, Wang GL, Yang SY, et al. Value of 18F-FDG-PET/PET-CT in differentiated thyroid carcinoma with radioiodine-negative whole-body scan: A meta-analysis. Nucl Med Commun 2009;30:639-50. |
|63.||Nahas Z, Goldenberg D, Fakhry C, Ewertz M, Zeiger M, Ladenson PW, et al. The role of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of recurrent papillary thyroid carcinoma. Laryngoscope 2005;115:237-43. |
|64.||Iagaru A, Kalinyak JE, McDougall IR. F-18 FDG PET/CT in the management of thyroid cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2007;32:690-5. |
|65.||Hoegerle S, Altehoefer C, Ghanem N, Brink I, Moser E, Nitzsche E. 18F-DOPA positron emission tomography for tumor detection in patients with medullary thyroid carcinoma and elevated calcitonin levels. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:64-71. |
|66.||Schwartz DL, Ford EC, Rajendran J, Yueh B, Coltrera MD, Virgin J, et al. FDG-PET/CT-guided intensity modulated head and neck radiotherapy: A pilot investigation. Head Neck 2005;27:478-87. |
|67.||Kumar R, Alavi A. Clinical applications of fluorodeoxyglucose--positron emission tomography in the management of malignant melanoma. Curr Opin Oncol 2005;17:154-9. |
|68.||Constantinidou A, Hofman M, O'Doherty M, Acland KM, Healy C, Harries M. Routine positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in melanoma staging with positive sentinel node biopsy is of limited benefit. Melanoma Res 2008;18:56-60. |
|69.||Singh B, Ezziddin S, Palmedo H, Reinhardt M, Strunk H, Tόting T, et al. Preoperative 18F-FDG-PET/CT imaging and sentinel node biopsy in the detection of regional lymph node metastases in malignant melanoma. Melanoma Res 2008;18:346-52. |
|70.||Kumar R, Mavi A, Bural G, Alavi A. Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET in the management of malignant melanoma. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43:23-33. |
|71.||Tyler DS, Onaitis M, Kherani A, Hata A, Nicholson E, Keogan M, et al. Positron emission tomography scanning in malignant melanoma: Clinical utility in patients with stage III disease. Cancer 2000;89:1019-25. |
|72.||Iagaru A, Quon A, Johnson D, Gambhir SS, McDougall IR. 2-Deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of melanoma. Mol Imaging Biol 2007;9:50-7. |
|73.||Rosenbaum SJ, Stergar H, Antoch G, Veit P, Bockisch A, Kόhl H. Staging and follow-up of gastrointestinal tumors with PET/CT. Abdom Imaging 2006;31:25-35. |
|74.||Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Ohja B, Bartolucci AA, Eloubeidi MA. The accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration, integrated positron emission tomography with computed tomography, and computed tomography in restaging patients with esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2005;129:1232-41. |
|75.||Kim K, Park SJ, Kim BT, Lee KS, Shim YM. Evaluation of lymph node metastases in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus with positron emission tomography. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;71:290-4. |
|76.||Sun L, Su XH, Guan YS, Pan WM, Luo ZM, Wei JH, et al. Clinical role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in post-operative follow up of gastric cancer: Initial results. World J Gastroenterol 2008;14:4627-32. |
|77.||Brenner W, Bohuslavizki KH, Eary JF. PET imaging of osteosarcoma. J Nucl Med 2003;44:930-42. |
|78.||Bajpai J, Gamanagatti S, Sharma MC, Kumar R, Vishnubhatla S, Khan SA, et al. Non-invasive imaging surrogate of angiogenesis in osteosarcoma. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2010;54:526-31. |
|79.||Bastiaannet E, Groen H, Jager PL, Cobben DC, van der Graaf WT, Vaalburg W, et al. The value of FDG-PET in the detection, grading and response to therapy of soft tissue and bone sarcomas; A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev 2004;30:83-101. |
|80.||Eary JF, Conrad EU, Bruckner JD, Folpe A, Hunt KJ, Mankoff DA, et al. Quantitative [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in pretreatment and grading of sarcoma. Clin Cancer Res 1998;4:1215-20. |
|81.||Lucas JD, O'Doherty MJ, Wong JC, Bingham JB, McKee PH, Fletcher CD, et al. Evaluation of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of soft-tissue sarcomas. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998; 80:441-447. |
|82.||Jadvar H, Conti PS. Diagnostic utility of FDG PET in multiple myeloma. Skeletal Radiol 2002;31:690-4. |
|83.||Kumar R, Alavi A. PET imaging in gynecologic malignancies. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:1155-67. |
|84.||Chung HH, Kang WJ, Kim JW, Park NH, Song YS, Chung JK, et al. Role of [18F]FDG PET/CT in the assessment of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer: Correlation with clinical or histological findings. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007;34:480-6. |
|85.||Kim CK, Park BK, Choi JY, Kim BG, Han H. Detection of recurrent ovarian cancer at MRI: Comparison with integrated PET/CT. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007;31:868-75. |
|86.||Smith GT, Hubner KF, McDonald T, Thie JA. Avoiding second-look surgery and reducing costs in managing patients with ovarian cancer by applying F-18-FDG PET. Clin Positron Imaging 1998;1:263. |
|87.||Castellucci P, Perrone AM, Picchio M, Ghi T, Farsad M, Nanni C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: Correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology. Nucl Med Commun 2007;28:589-95. |
|88.||Karlan BY, Hawkins R, Hoh C, Lee M, Tse N, Cane P, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose can detect recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 1993;51:175-81. |
|89.||Pannu HK, Bristow RE, Cohade C, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. et al. PET-CT in recurrent ovarian cancer: Initial observations. Radiographics 2004;24:209-23. |
|90.||Bristow RE, del Carmen MG, Pannu HK, Cohade C, Zahurak ML, Fishman EK, et al. Clinically occult recurrent ovarian cancer: Patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery using combined PET/CT. Gynecol Oncol 2003;90:519-28. |
|91.||Jover R, Lourido D, Gonzalez C, Rojo A, Gorospe L, Alfonso JM. Role of PET/CT in the evaluation of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2008;110:S55-9. |
|92.||Grigsby PW. The prognostic value of PET and PET/CT in cervical cancer. Cancer Imaging 2008;8:146-55. |
|93.||Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Bristow RE, Wahl RL. Imaging uterine cervical cancer with FDG-PET/CT: Direct comparison with PET. Mol Imaging Biol 2009;11:229-35. |
|94.||Roh JW, Seo SS, Lee S, Kang KW, Kim SK, Sim JS, et al. Role of positron emission tomography in pretreatment lymph node staging of uterine cervical cancer: A prospective surgicopathologic correlation study. Eur J Cancer 2005;41:2086-92. |
|95.||Havrilesky LJ, Kulasingam SL, Matchar DB, Myers ER. FDG-PET for management of cervical and ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2005;97:183-91. |
|96.||Ma SY, See LC, Lai CH, Chou HH, Tsai CS, Ng KK, et al. Delayed (18)F-FDG PET for detection of paraaortic lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1775-83. |
|97.||Kim SK, Choi HJ, Park SY, Lee HY, Seo SS, Yoo CW, et al. Additional value of MR/PET fusion compared with PET/CT in the detection of lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:2103-9. |
|98.||Kumar R, Dadparvar S. 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose-positron emission tomography (PET)/PET-computed tomography in carcinoma of the cervix. Cancer 2007;110:1650-3. |
|99.||Pandharipande PV, Choy G, del Carmen MG, Gazelle GS, Russell AH, Lee SI. MRI and PET/CT for triaging stage IB clinically operable cervical cancer to appropriate therapy: Decision analysis to assess patient outcomes. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:802-14. |
|100.||Sofue K, Tateishi U, Sawada M, Maeda T, Terauchi T, Kano D, et al. Role of carbon-11 choline PET/CT in the management of uterine carcinoma: Initial experience. Ann Nucl Med 2009;23:235-43. |
|101.||Grigsby PW, Mutch DG, Rader J, Herzog TJ, Zoberi I, Siegel BA, et al. Lack of benefit of concurrent chemotherapy in patients with cervical cancer and negative lymph nodes by FDG-PET. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;61:444-49. |
|102.||Esthappan J, Mutic S, Malyapa RS, Grigsby PW, Zoberi I, Dehdashti F, et al. Treatment planning guidelines regarding the use of CT/PET-guided IMRT for cervical carcinoma with positive paraaortic lymph nodes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;58:1289-97. |
|103.||Farma JM, Santillan AA, Melis M, Walters J, Belinc D, Chen DT, et al. PET/CT fusion scan enhances CT staging in patients with pancreatic neoplasms. Ann Surg Oncol 2008;15:2465-71. |
|104.||Strobel K, Heinrich S, Bhure U, Soyka J, Veit-Haibach P, Pestalozzi BC, et al. Contrast-enhanced 18F-FDG PET/CT: 1-stop-shop imaging for assessing the resectability of pancreatic cancer. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1408-13. |
|105.||Tang S, Huang G, Liu J, Liu T, Treven L, Song S, et al. Usefulness of (18)F-FDG PET, combined FDG-PET/CT and EUS in diagnosing primary pancreatic carcinoma: A meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2009 Oct 22. [In press] |
|106.||Nitzsche EU, Hoegerle S, Mix M, Brink I, Otte A, Moser E, et al. Non-invasive differentiation of pancreatic lesions: Is analysis of FDG kinetics superior to semi quantitative uptake value analysis? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:237-42. |
|107.||Sperti C, Pasquali C, Decet G, Chierichetti F, Liessi G, Pedrazzoli S. F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in differentiating malignant from benign pancreatic cysts: A prospective study. J Gastrointest Surg 2005;9:22-8. |
|108.||Heinrich S, Goerres GW, Schδfer M, Sagmeister M, Bauerfeind P, Pestalozzi BC, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography influences on the management of resectable pancreatic cancer and its cost-effectiveness. Ann Surg 2005;242:235-43. |
|109.||Quon A, Chang ST, Chin F, Kamaya A, Dick DW, Loo BW Jr, et al. Initial evaluation of 18F-fluorothymidine (FLT) PET/CT scanning for primary pancreatic cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:527-31. |
|110.||Yoshioka M, Sato T, Furuya T, Shibata S, Andoh H, Asanuma Y, et al. Role of positron emission tomography with 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose in evaluating the effects of arterial infusion chemotherapy and radiotherapy on pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol 2004;39:50-5. |
|111.||Trojan J, Schroeder O, Raedle J, Baum RP, Herrmann G, Jacobi V, et al. Fluorine-18 FDG positron emission tomography for imaging of hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol 1999;94:3314-9. |
|112.||Han AR, Gwak GY, Choi MS, Lee JH, Koh KC, Paik SW, et al. The clinical value of 18F-FDG PET/CT for investigating unexplained serum AFP elevation following interventional therapy for hepatocellular carcinom. Hepatogastroenterology 2009;56:1111-6. |
|113.||Khan MA, Combs CS, Brunt EM, Lowe VJ, Wolverson MK, Solomon H, et al. Positron emission tomography scanning in the evaluation of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2000;32:792-7. |
|114.||Sun L, Guan YS, Pan WM, Chen GB, Luo ZM, Wu H. Positron emission tomography/computer tomography in guidance of extrahepatic hepatocellular carcinoma metastasis management. World J Gastroenterol 2007;13:5413-5. |
|115.||Hwang KH, Choi DJ, Lee SY, Lee MK, Choe W. Evaluation of patients with hepatocellular carcinomas using [(11)C]acetate and [(18)F]FDG PET/CT: A preliminary study. Appl Radiat Isot 2009;67:1195-8. |
|116.||Park JW, Kim JH, Kim SK, Kang KW, Park KW, Choi JI, et al. A prospective evaluation of 18F-FDG and 11C-acetate PET/CT for detection of primary and metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1912-21. |
|117.||Goerres GW, Stupp R, Barghouth G, Hany TF, Pestalozzi B, Dizendorf E, 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;32:153-62. |
|118.||Basu S, Mohandas KM, Peshwe H, Asopa R, Vyawahare M. FDG-PET and PET/CT in the clinical management of gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Nucl Med Commun 2008;29:1026-39. |
|119.||Kamiyama Y, Aihara R, Nakabayashi T, Mochiki E, Asao T, Kuwano H, et al. (18)F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography: Useful Technique for Predicting Malignant Potential of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors. World J Surg 2005;29:1429-35. |
|120.||Kumar R, Zhuang H, Alavi A. PET in the management of urologic malignancies. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:1141-53. |
|121.||Schφder H, Larson SM. Positron emission tomography for prostate, bladder, and renal cancer. Semin Nucl Med 2004;34:274-92. |
|122.||Oyama N, Akino H, Suzuki Y, Kanamaru H, Sadato N, Yonekura Y, et al. The increased accumulation of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose in untreated prostate cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 1999;29:623-9. |
|123.||Reske SN, Blumstein NM, Glatting G. 11C- choline PET/CT imaging in occult local relapse of prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:9-17. |
|124.||Shreve PD, Grossman HB, Gross MD, Wahl RL. Metastatic prostate cancer: Initial findings of PET with 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose. Radiology 1996;199:751-6. |
|125.||Garcνa JR, Soler M, Blanch MA, Ramνrez I, Riera E, Lozano P, et al. PET/CT with (11)C-choline and (18)F-FDG in patients with elevated PSA after radical treatment of a prostate cancer. Rev Esp Med Nucl 2009;28:95-100. |
|126.||Kibel AS, Dehdashti F, Katz MD, Klim AP, Grubb RL, Humphrey PA, et al. Prospective study of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for staging of muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:4314-20. |
|127.||de Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Jongen MM, Mensink HJ, Vaalburg W. Visualisation of bladder cancer using (11)C-choline PET: First clinical experience. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1283-8. |
|128.||Safaei A, Figlin R, Hoh CK, Silverman DH, Seltzer M, Phelps ME, et al. The usefulness of F-18 deoxyglucose whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) for re-staging of renal cell cancer. Clin Nephrol 2002;57:56-62. |
|129.||Aide N, Cappele O, Bottet P, Bensadoun H, Regeasse A, Comoz F, et al. Efficiency of [18F]F18-FDG- PETin characterizing renal cancer and detecting distant metastases: A comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:1236-45. |
|130.||Kang DE, White RL Jr, Zuger JH, Sasser HC, Teigland CM. Clinical use of fluorodeoxyglucose F 18 positron emission tomography for detection of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 2004;171:1806-9. |
|131.||Kumar R, Chauhan A, Lakhani P, Xiu Y, Zhuang H, Alavi A. 2-Deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography in characterization of solid renal masses. Mol Imaging Biol 2005;7:431-9. |
|132.||Vercellino L, Bousquet G, Baillet G, Barrι E, Mathieu O, Just PA, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging for an early assessment of response to sunitinib in metastatic renal carcinoma: Preliminary study. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2009;24:137-44. |
|133.||Hain SF, O'Doherty MJ, Timothy AR, Leslie MD, Partridge SE, Huddart RA. Fluorodeoxyglucose PET in the initial staging of germ cell tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27:590-4. |
|134.||Tsatalpas P, Beuthien-Baumann B, Kropp J, Manseck A, Tiepolt C, Hakenberg OW, et al. Diagnostic value of 18F-FDG positron emission tomography for detection and treatment control of malignant germ cell tumors. Urol Int 2002;68:157-63. |
|135.||Spermon JR, De Geus-Oei LF, Kiemeney LA, Witjes JA, Oyen WJ. The role of (18)fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in initial staging and restaging after chemotherapy for testicular germ cell tumours. BJU Int 2002;89:549-56. |
|136.||Lassen U, Daugaard G, Eigtved A, Hψjgaard L, Damgaard K, Rψrth M. Whole-body FDG-PET in patients with stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:396-402. |
|137.||Jana S, Blaufox MD. Nuclear medicine studies of the prostate, testes, and bladder. Semin Nucl Med 2006;36:51-72. |
|138.||De Santis M, Bokemeyer C, Becherer A, Stoiber F, Oechsle K, Kletter K, et al. Predictive impact of 2- 18fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography for residual postchemotherapy masses in patients with bulky seminoma. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3740-4. |
|139.||Becherer A, De Santis M, Karanikas G, Szabσ M, Bokemeyer C, Dohmen BM, et al. FDG PET is superior to CT in the prediction of viable tumor in post-chemotherapy seminoma residuals. Eur J Radiol 2005;54:284-8. |
|140.||Li S, Beheshti M. The radionuclide molecular imaging and therapy of neuroendocrine tumors. Curr Cancer Drug Targets 2005;5:139-48. |
|141.||Eriksson B, Orlefors H, Oberg K, Sundin A, Bergstrφm M, Lεngstrφm B. Developments in PET for the detection of endocrine tumours. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005;19:311-24. |
|142.||Hoegerle S, Nitzsche E, Altehoefer C, Ghanem N, Manz T, Brink I, et al. Pheochromocytomas: Detection with 18F DOPA whole body PET--initial results. Radiology 2002;222:507-12. |
|143.||Brink I, Hoegerle S, Klisch J, Bley TA. Imaging of pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. Fam Cancer 2005;4:61-8. |
|144.||Ilias I, Pacak K. Anatomical and functional imaging of metastatic pheochromocytoma. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004;1018:495-504. |
|145.||Pacak K, Eisenhofer G, Carrasquillo JA, Chen CC, Whatley M, Goldstein DS. Diagnostic localization of pheochromocytoma: The coming of age of positron emission tomography. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2002;970:170-6. |
|146.||Trampal C, Engler H, Juhlin C, Bergstrφm M, Lεngstrφm B. Pheochromocytomas: Detection with 11C hydroxyephedrine PET. Radiology 2004;230:423-8. |
|147.||Zuetenhorst JM, Taal BG. Metastatic carcinoid tumors: A clinical review. Oncologist 2005;10:123-31. |
|148.||Hoegerle S, Altehoefer C, Ghanem N, Koehler G, Waller CF, Scheruebl H, et al. Whole-body 18F dopa PET for detection of gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors. Radiology 2001;220:373-80. |
|149.||Kumar R, Jindal T, Kumar A, Dutta R. (68) Ga-DOTA-TOC/NOC in bronchial carcinoids. Nucl Med Commun 2009;30:822; 822-3. |
|150.||Goldsmith SJ. Update on nuclear medicine imaging of neuroendocrine tumors. Future Oncol 2009;5:75-84. |
|151.||Kumar R, Xiu Y, Yu JQ, Takalkar A, El-Haddad G, Potenta S, et al. 18F-FDG PET in evaluation of adrenal lesions in patients with lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2004;45:2058-62. |
|152.||Minn H, Salonen A, Friberg J, Roivainen A, Viljanen T, Lεngsjφ J, et al. Imaging of adrenal incidentalomas with PET using (11)C-metomidate and (18)F-FDG. J Nucl Med 2004;45:972-9. |
|153.||Jana S, Zhang T, Milstein DM, Isasi CR, Blaufox MD. FDG-PET and CT characterization of adrenal lesions in cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:29-35. |
|154.||Yun M, Kim W, Alnafisi N, Lacorte L, Jang S, Alavi A. 18F-FDG PET in characterizing adrenal lesions detected on CT or MRI. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1795-9. |
|155.||Rubello D, Rufini V, Casara D, Calcagni ML, Samanes Gajate AM, Shapiro B. Clinical role of positron emission tomography (PET) in endocrine tumours. Panminerva Med. 2002;44:185-96. |
|156.||Bergstrφm M, Juhlin C, Bonasera TA, Sundin A, Rastad J, Akerstrφm G, et al. PET imaging of adrenal cortical tumors with the 11ί-hydroxylase tracer 11C-metomidate. J Nucl Med 2000;41:275-82. |
|157.||Bergstrφm M, Bonasera TA, Lu L, Bergstrφm E, Backlin C, Juhlin C, et al. In vitro and in vivo primate evaluation of carbon-11-etomidate and carbon-11-metomidate as potential tracers for PET imaging of the adrenal cortex and its tumors. J Nucl Med 1998;39:982-9. |
|158.||Van Heertum RL, Greenstein EA, Tikofsky RS. 2-deoxy-fluorglucose-positron emission tomography imaging of the brain: Current clinical applications with emphasis on the dementias. Semin Nucl Med 2004;34:300-12. |
|159.||Barker FG 2nd, Chang SM, Valk PE, Pounds TR, Prados MD. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and survival of patients with suspected recurrent malignant glioma. Cancer 1997;79:115-26. |
|160.||Spence AM, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, O'Sullivan SF, Link JM, Lewellen TK, et al. 18F-FDG PET of gliomas at delayed intervals: Improved distinction between tumor and normal gray matter. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1653-9. |
|161.||Herholz K, Hφlzer T, Bauer B, Schrφder R, Voges J, Ernestus RI, et al. 11C-methionine PET for differential diagnosis of low-grade gliomas. Neurology 1998;50:1316-22. |
|162.||Chen W, Cloughesy T, Kamdar N, Satyamurthy N, Bergsneider M, Liau L, et al. Imaging proliferation in brain tumors with 18F-FLT PET: Comparison with 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med 2005;46:945-52. |
|163.||Floeth FW, Pauleit D, Wittsack HJ, Langen KJ, Reifenberger G, Hamacher K, et al. Multimodal metabolic imaging of cerebral gliomas: Positron emission tomography with [18F]fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine and magnetic resonance spectroscopy. J Neurosurg 2005;102:318-27. |
|164.||Pauleit D, Floeth F, Hamacher K, Riemenschneider MJ, Reifenberger G, Mόller HW, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET combined with MRI improves the diagnostic assessment of cerebral gliomas. Brain 2005;128:678-87. |
[Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9], [Figure 10], [Figure 11], [Figure 12], [Figure 13], [Figure 14], [Figure 15], [Figure 16], [Figure 17], [Figure 18], [Figure 19], [Figure 20]
|This article has been cited by|
||Intelligent magnetic manipulation for gastrointestinal ultrasound
| ||Joseph C. Norton,Piotr R. Slawinski,Holly S. Lay,James W. Martin,Benjamin F. Cox,Gerard Cummins,Marc P.Y. Desmulliez,Richard E. Clutton,Keith L. Obstein,Sandy Cochran,Pietro Valdastri |
| ||Science Robotics. 2019; 4(31): eaav7725 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||A depth encoding PET detector using four-crystals-to-one-SiPM coupling and light-sharing window method
| ||Xi Zhang,Siwei Xie,Jingwu Yang,Fenghua Weng,Jianfeng Xu,Qiu Huang,Qiyu Peng |
| ||Medical Physics. 2019; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Rebound (reactive) thymic hyperplasia after chemotherapy in children with lymphoma
| ||Ashraf Fouda,Shaimaa Kandil,Gihad Hamid,Khadijah Boujettif,Mohamed Mahfouz,Mohamed Abdelaziz |
| ||Anales de Pediatría (English Edition). 2019; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Diagnostic performance of real-time robotic arm-assisted 18F-FDG PET/CT-guided percutaneous biopsy in metabolically active abdominal and pelvic lesions
| ||Rajender Kumar,Bhagwant Rai Mittal,Anish Bhattacharya,Harmandeep Singh,Amanjit Bal,Shelvin Kumar Vadi,Ashwani Sood,Gaurav Prakash,Harjeet Singh,Aman Sharma |
| ||European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2019; 46(4): 838 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Hiperplasia tímica de rebote posquimioterapia en niños con linfoma
| ||Ashraf Fouda,Shaimaa Kandil,Gihad Hamid,Khadijah Boujettif,Mohamed Mahfouz,Mohamed Abdelaziz |
| ||Anales de Pediatría. 2019; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Responsive Nanomicellar Theranostic Cages for Metastatic Breast Cancer
| ||Amrutha Manigandan,Vandhana Handi,Niranjana Sri Sundaramoorthy,Ramya Dhandapani,Janani Radhakrishnan,Swaminathan Sethuraman,Anuradha Subramanian |
| ||Bioconjugate Chemistry. 2018; 29(2): 275 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the diagnosis and staging of extramammary Paget’s disease
| ||Ying Tian,Hu-Bing Wu,Dong-Li Li,Hong-Sheng Li,Wen-Lan Zhou,Quan-Shi Wang |
| ||Nuclear Medicine Communications. 2015; 36(9): 892 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Appropriate use of positron emission tomography with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose for staging of oncology patients
| ||Luca Tagliabue,Angelo Del Sole |
| ||European Journal of Internal Medicine. 2014; 25(1): 6 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Oncologic PET/CT interpretation and reporting approaches
| ||D. Karantanis,D. Kalkanis,M. S. Allen-Auerbach,K. Herrmann,K. L. Pomykala,T. V. Bogsrud,V. J. Lowe,J. Czernin |
| ||Nuklearmedizin. 2014; 53(2) |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Synthesis and preliminary biological evaluation of S-11C-methyl-d-cysteine as a new amino acid PET tracer for cancer imaging
| ||Tingting Huang,Ganghua Tang,Hongliang Wang,Dahong Nie,Xiaolan Tang,Xiang Liang,Kongzhen Hu,Chang Yi,Baoguo Yao,Caihua Tang |
| ||Amino Acids. 2014; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
|| result 1 Document Appropriate use of positron emission tomography with [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose for staging of oncology patients
| || Authors of Document Tagliabue, L., Del Sole, A. |
| ||Source of the Document European Journal of Internal Medicine. 2014; |
||The diagnostic usefulness of FDG-PET/CT in detecting tumor recurrence not evident in whole body I131 scan in differentiated thyroid carcinoma
| ||Maged Abdel Galil Hamed,Ahmed Fathy Abdel Ghany,Noha Mohamed Osman |
| ||The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2014; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
|| result 3 Document FDG-PET/CT in lymphoma
| || Authors of Document DæSouza, M.D., Jaimini, A., Bansal, A., (...), Mondal, A., Tripathi, R.P. |
| ||Source of the Document Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging. 2013; |
||Functional imaging of the bowel
| ||Nyree Griffin,Vicky Goh |
| ||Abdominal Imaging. 2013; 38(6): 1203 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Diagnostic value of combined 18F-FDG PET/MRI for staging and restaging in paediatric oncology
| ||Thomas Pfluger,Henriette I. Melzer,Wolfgang P. Mueller,Eva Coppenrath,Peter Bartenstein,Michael H. Albert,Irene Schmid |
| ||European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2012; 39(11): 1745 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||The Effects of Preoperative18F-FDG PET/CT in Breast Cancer Patients in Comparison to the Conventional Imaging Study
| ||Young Jin Choi,Young Duck Shin,Yoon Hee Kang,Moon Soo Lee,Min Koo Lee,Byung Sun Cho,Yoon Jung Kang,Ju Seung Park |
| ||Journal of Breast Cancer. 2012; 15(4): 441 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Regional nodal staging with 18F-FDG PET–CT in non-small cell lung cancer: Additional diagnostic value of CT attenuation and dual-time-point imaging
| ||Meng Li,Ning Wu,Ying Liu,Rong Zheng,Ying Liang,Wenjie Zhang,Ping Zhao |
| ||European Journal of Radiology. 2012; 81(8): 1886 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Preclinical characterization of 18F-D-FPHCys, a new amino acid-based PET tracer
| ||Delphine Denoyer,Laura Kirby,Kelly Waldeck,Peter Roselt,Oliver C. Neels,Thomas Bourdier,Rachael Shepherd,Andrew Katsifis,Rodney J. Hicks |
| ||European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2012; 39(4): 703 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||From cancer metabolism to new biomarkers and drug targets
| ||F. Chiaradonna,R.M. Moresco,C. Airoldi,D. Gaglio,R. Palorini,F. Nicotra,C. Messa,L. Alberghina |
| ||Biotechnology Advances. 2012; 30(1): 30 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Primary tumor PET/CT [18F]FDG uptake is an independent predictive factor for regional lymph node metastasis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer
| ||Li, M. and Wu, N. and Zheng, R. and Liang, Y. and Liu, Y. and Zhang, W. and Li, N. and Zhao, P. |
| ||Cancer Imaging. 2012; 12(3): 566-572 |
||The effects of preoperative 18F-FDG PET/CT in breast cancer patients in comparison to the conventional imaging study
| ||Choi, Y.J. and Shin, Y.D. and Kang, Y.H. and Lee, M.S. and Lee, M.K. and Cho, B.S. and Kang, Y.J. and Seung Park, J. |
| ||Journal of Breast Cancer. 2012; 15(4): 441-448 |
||Diagnostic value of combined 18F-FDG PET/MRI for staging and restaging in paediatric oncology
| ||Pfluger, T. and Melzer, H.I. and Mueller, W.P. and Coppenrath, E. and Bartenstein, P. and Albert, M.H. and Schmid, I. |
| ||European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2012; 39(11): 1745-1755 |
||Regional nodal staging with 18F-FDG PET-CT in non-small cell lung cancer: Additional diagnostic value of CT attenuation and dual-time-point imaging
| ||Li, M. and Wu, N. and Liu, Y. and Zheng, R. and Liang, Y. and Zhang, W. and Zhao, P. |
| ||European Journal of Radiology. 2012; 81(8): 1886-1890 |
||Preclinical characterization of 18F-D-FPHCys, a new amino acid-based PET tracer
| ||Denoyer, D. and Kirby, L. and Waldeck, K. and Roselt, P. and Neels, O.C. and Bourdier, T. and Shepherd, R. and Katsifis, A. and Hicks, R.J. |
| ||European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 2012; 39(4): 703-712 |
||From cancer metabolism to new biomarkers and drug targets
| ||Chiaradonna, F., Moresco, R.M., Airoldi, C., Gaglio, D., Palorini, R., Nicotra, F., Messa, C., Alberghina, L. |
| ||Biotechnology Advances. 2012; 30(1): 30-51 |
||Recommendations for the use of positron emission tomography in oncology | [Zalecenia w zakresie zastosowania badań pozytonowej emisyjnej tomografii w onkologii]
| ||Krzakowski, M., Rutkowski, P., Jassem, J., Zaucha, R., Fijuth, J., Słuszniak, J., Jarza̧b, B., (...), Królicki, L. |
| ||Nowotwory. 2011; 61(1): 57-69 |
||Preliminary study on the evaluation of olfactory neuroblastoma using PET/CT
| ||Wu, H.-B., Wang, Q.-S., Zhong, J.-M., Zhou, W.-L., Li, H.-S., Qiao-Yu, W. |
| ||Clinical Nuclear Medicine. 2011; 36(10): 894-898 |
||Preliminary Study on the Evaluation of Olfactory Neuroblastoma Using PET/CT
| ||Hu-bing Wu,Quan-shi Wang,Jin-mei Zhong,Wen-lan Zhou,Hong-sheng Li,Wang Qiao-yu |
| ||Clinical Nuclear Medicine. 2011; 36(10): 894 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
|| result 11 Document Zalecenia w zakresie zastosowania badań pozytonowej emisyjnej tomografii w onkologii | [Recommendations for the use of positron emission tomography in oncology]
| || Authors of Document Krzakowski, M., Rutkowski, P., Jassem, J., (...), Polkowski, W., Królicki, L. |
| ||Nowotwory. 2010; |
||From pure research imaging tool to PET-guided personalized medicine in oncology: A true revolution in modern medicine
| ||Basu, S. |
| ||Indian Journal of Cancer. 2010; 47(2): 98-99 |