CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging 2015; 25(02): 88-101
DOI: 10.4103/0971-3026.155823
Imaging in Oncology: Recent Advances

Appropriateness criteria of FDG PET/CT in oncology

Archi Agrawal
Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
,
Venkatesh Rangarajan
Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

18Fluorine-2-fluoro-2-Deoxy-d-glucose (18 F-FDG) positron emission tomography/computerized tomography (PET/CT) is a well-established functional imaging method widely used in oncology. In this article, we have incorporated the various indications for18 FDG PET/CT in oncology based on available evidence and current guidelines. Growing body of evidence for use of18 FDG PET/CT in select tumors is also discussed. This article attempts to give the reader an overview of the appropriateness of using18 F-FDG PET/CT in various malignancies.



Publication History

Publication Date:
30 July 2021 (online)

© 2015. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 
  • References

  • 1 A Guide to Clinical PET in Oncology. Available from: http://www.pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1605_web.pdf. [Last accessed on  2014 Aug 16].
  • 2 PET/CT Practice Guidelines in Oncology-Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. Available from: http://www.snm.org/docs/PET./OncologyPracticeGuidelineSummary.pdf. [Last accessed on 2014 Aug 16].
  • 3 Kostakoglu L, Cheson BD. Current role of FDG PET/CT in lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014;41:1004-27.
  • 4 Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, Pedersen LM, Berthelsen AK, Keiding S, et al. Positron emission tomography with or without computed tomography in the primary staging of Hodgkin′s lymphoma. Haematologica 2006;91:482-9.
  • 5 Kwee TC, Kwee RM, Nievelstein RA. Imaging in staging of malignant lymphoma: A systematic review. Blood 2008;111:504-16.
  • 6 Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C, Seifert B, Stumpe KD, von Schulthess GK, et al. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: Coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging-do we need contrast-enhanced CT? Radiology 2004;232:823-9.
  • 7 Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, Gascoyne RD, Specht L, Horning SJ, et al.; International Harmonization Project on Lymphoma. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:579-86.
  • 8 Raanani P, Shasha Y, Perry C, Metser U, Naparstek E, Apter S, et al. Is CT scan still necessary for staging in Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients in the PET/CT era? Ann Oncol 2006;17:117-22.
  • 9 Hoffmann M, Wöhrer S, Becherer A, Chott A, Streubel B, Kletter K, et al. 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography in lymphoma of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue: Histology makes the difference. Ann Oncol 2006;17:1761-5.
  • 10 Treglia G, Zucca E, Sadeghi R, Cavalli F, Giovanella L, Ceriani L. Detection rate of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with marginal zone lymphoma of MALT type: A meta-analysis. Hematol Oncol 2014. [Epub ahead of print].
  • 11 Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, Cavalli F, Schwartz LH, Lister TA.; Alliance, Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Consortium; Italian Lymphoma Foundation; European Organisation for Research; Treatment of Cancer/Dutch Hemato-Oncology Group; et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: The Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3059-68.
  • 12 Treglia G, Salsano M, Stefanelli A, Mattoli MV, Giordano A, Bonomo L. Diagnostic accuracy of 18 F-FDG-PET and PET/CT in patients with Ewing sarcoma family tumours: A systematic review and a meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol 2012;41:249-56.
  • 13 Franzius C, Sciuk J, Daldrup-Link HE, Jürgens H, Schober O. FDG-PET for detection of osseous metastases from malignant primary bone tumours: Comparison with bone scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27:1305-11.
  • 14 Daldrup-Link HE, Franzius C, Link TM, Laukamp D, Sciuk J, Jürgens H, et al. Whole-body MR imaging for detection of bone metastases in children and young adults: Comparison with skeletal scintigraphy and FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001;177:2209-36.
  • 15 Györke T, Zajic T, Lange A, Schäfer O, Moser E, Makó E, et al. Impact of FDG PET for staging of Ewing sarcomas and primitive neuroectodermal tumours. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27:17-24.
  • 16 Völker T, Denecke T, Steffen I, Misch D, Schönberger S, Plotkin M, et al. Positron emission tomography for staging of pediatric sarcoma patients: Results of a prospective multicentre trial. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:5435-41.
  • 17 Franzius C, Daldrup-Link HE, Sciuk J, Rummeny EJ, Bielack S, Jürgens H, et al. FDG-PET for detection of pulmonary metastases from malignant primary bone tumors: Comparison with spiral CT. Ann Oncol 2001;12:479-86.
  • 18 Hongtao L, Hui Z, Bingshun W, Xiaojin W, Zhiyu W, Shuier Z, et al. 18F-FDG positron emission tomography for the assessment of histological response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in osteosarcomas: A meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2012;21:e165-70.
  • 19 Purandare NC, Rangarajan V, Agarwal M, Sharma AR, Shah S, Arora A, et al. Integrated PET/CT in evaluating sarcomatous transformation in osteochondromas. Clin Nucl Med 2009;34:350-4.
  • 20 Brenner W, Conrad EU, Eary JF. FDG PET imaging for grading and prediction of outcome in chondrosarcoma patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:189-95.
  • 21 Groheux D, Espié M, Giacchetti S, Hindié E. Performance of FDG PET/CT in the clinical management of breast cancer. Radiology 2013;266:388-405.
  • 22 Groheux D, Giacchetti S, Delord M, Hindié E, Vercellino L, Cuvier C, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT in staging patients with locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer: Comparison to conventional staging. J Nucl Med 2013;54:5-11.
  • 23 Sharma B, Martin A, Zerizer I. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography in liver imaging. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2013;34:66-80.
  • 24 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.
  • 25 Sugiyama M, Sakahara H, Torizuka T, Kanno T, Nakamura F, Futatsubashi M, et al. 18F-FDG PET in the detection of extrahepatic metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol 2004;39:961-8.
  • 26 Nagaoka S, Itano S, Ishibashi M, Torimura T, Baba K, Akiyoshi J, et al. Value of fusing PET plus CT images in hepatocellular carcinoma and combined hepatocellular and cholangiocarcinoma patients with extrahepatic metastases: Preliminary findings. Liver Int 2006;26:781-8.
  • 27 Kawaoka T, Aikata H, Takaki S, Uka K, Azakami T, Saneto H, et al. FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of extrahepatic metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Res 2009;39:134-42.
  • 28 Hatano E, Ikai I, Higashi T, Teramukai S, Torizuka T, Saga T, et al. Preoperative positron emission tomography with fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose is predictive of prognosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after resection. World J Surg 2006;30:1736-41.
  • 29 Seo S, Hatano E, Higashi T, Hara T, Tada M, Tamaki N, et al. Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography predicts tumour differentiation, P- glycoprotein expression, and outcome after resection in hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:427-33.
  • 30 Kornberg A, Freesmeyer M, Bärthel E, Jandt K, Katenkamp K, Steenbeck J, et al. 18F-FDG-uptake of hepatocellular carcinoma on PET predicts microvascular tumor invasion in liver transplant patients. Am J Transplant 2009;9:592-600.
  • 31 Kluge R, Schmidt F, Caca K, Barthel H, Hesse S, Georgi P, et al. Positron emission tomography with [(18) F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose for diagnosis and staging of bile duct cancer. Hepatology 2001;33:1029-35.
  • 32 Kim YJ, Yun M, Lee WJ, Kim KS, Lee JD. Usefulness of 18F-FDG PET in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:1467-72.
  • 33 Kato T, Tsukamoto E, Kuge Y, Katoh C, Nambu T, Nobuta A, et al. Clinical role of (18) F-FDG PET for initial staging of patients with extrahepatic bile duct cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1047-54.
  • 34 Petrowsky H, Wildbrett P, Husarik DB, Hany TF, Tam S, Jochum W, et al. Impact of integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography on staging and management of gallbladder cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatol 2006;45:43-50.
  • 35 Jadvar H, Henderson RW, Conti PS. [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography: Computed tomography in recurrent and metastatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007;31:223-8.
  • 36 Ramos-Font C, Gómez-Rio M, Rodríguez-Fernández A, Jiménez-Heffernan A, Sánchez Sánchez R, Llamas-Elvira JM. Ability of FDG-PET/CT in the detection of gallbladder cancer. J Surg Oncol 2014;109:218-24.
  • 37 Shukla PJ, Barreto SG, Arya S, Shrikhande SV, Hawaldar R, Purandare N, et al. Does PET-CT scan have a role prior to radical re-resection for incidental gallbladder cancer? HPB (Oxford) 2008;10:439-45.
  • 38 Shrikhande SV, Barreto SG, Goel M, Arya S. Multimodality imaging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A review of the literature. HPB (Oxford) 2012;14:658-68.
  • 39 Rijkers AP, Valkema R, Duivenvoorden HJ, van Eijck CH. Usefulness of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to confirm suspected pancreatic cancer: A meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2014;40:794-804.
  • 40 Yun M. Imaging of gastric cancer metabolism using 18 F-FDG PET/CT. J Gastric Cancer 2014;14:1-6.
  • 41 Chung HW, Lee EJ, Cho YH, Yoon SY, So Y, Kim SY, et al. High FDG uptake in PET/CT predicts worse prognosis in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2010;136:1929-35.
  • 42 Park JC, Lee JH, Cheoi K, Chung H, Yun MJ, Lee H, et al. Predictive value of pretreatment metabolic activity measured by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic advanced gastric cancer: The maximal SUV of the stomach is a prognostic factor. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012;39:1107-16.
  • 43 Mukai K, Ishida Y, Okajima K, Isozaki H, Morimoto T, Nishiyama S. Usefulness of preoperative FDG-PET for detection of gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 2006;9:192-6.
  • 44 Kim EY, Lee WJ, Choi D, Lee SJ, Choi JY, Kim BT, et al. The value of PET/CT for preoperative staging of advanced gastric cancer: Comparison with contrast-enhanced CT. Eur J Radiol 2011;79:183-8.
  • 45 Yoshioka T, Yamaguchi K, Kubota K, Saginoya T, Yamazaki T, Ido T, et al. Evaluation of 18F-FDG PET in patients with advanced, metastatic, or recurrent gastric cancer. J Nucl Med 2003;44:690-9.
  • 46 Yun M, Lim JS, Noh SH, Hyung WJ, Cheong JH, Bong JK, et al. Lymph node staging of gastric cancer using (18) F-FDG PET: A comparison study with CT. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1582-8.
  • 47 Yang QM, Kawamura T, Itoh H, Bando E, Nemoto M, Akamoto S, et al. Is PET-CT suitable for predicting lymph node status for gastric cancer? Hepatogastroenterology 2008;55:782-5.
  • 48 Lim JS, Kim MJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT, Kim JH, Hwang HS, et al. Comparison of CT and 18F-FDG pet for detecting peritoneal metastasis on the preoperative evaluation for gastric carcinoma. Korean J Radiol 2006;7:249-56.
  • 49 Wu LM, Hu JN, Hua J, Gu HY, Zhu J, Xu JR. 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography to evaluate recurrent gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012;27:472-80.
  • 50 Zou H, Zhao Y. 18FDG PET-CT for detecting gastric cancer recurrence after surgical resection: A meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2013;22:162-6.
  • 51 Bipat S, Niekel MC, Comans EF, Nio CY, Bemelman WA, Verhoef C, et al. Imaging modalities for the staging of patients with colorectal cancer. Neth J Med 2012;70:26-34.
  • 52 Patel S, McCall M, Ohinmaa A, Bigam D, Dryden DM. Positron emission tomography/computed tomographic scans compared to computed tomographic scans for detecting colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review. Ann Surg 2011;253:666-71.
  • 53 Guillem JG, Ruby JA, Leibold T, Akhurst TJ, Yeung HW, Gollub MJ, et al. Neither FDG-PET nor CT can distinguish between a pathological complete response and an incomplete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer: A prospective study. Ann Surg 2013;258:289-95.
  • 54 Denecke T, Rau B, Hoffmann KT, Hildebrandt B, Ruf J, Gutberlet M, et al. Comparison of CT, MRI and FDG-PET in response prediction of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer after multimodal preoperative therapy: Is there a benefit in using functional imaging? Eur Radiol 2005;15:1658-66.
  • 55 Maffione AM, Chondrogiannis S, Capirci C, Galeotti F, Fornasiero A, Crepaldi G, et al. Early prediction of response by 18 F-FDG PET/CT during preoperative therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: A systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol 2014;40:1186-94.
  • 56 Lu YY, Chen JH, Chien CR, Chen WT, Tsai SC, Lin WY, et al. Use of FDG-PET or PET/CT to detect recurrent colorectal cancer in patients with elevated CEA: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 2013;28:1039-47.
  • 57 Choi H. Response evaluation of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Oncologist 2008;13(Suppl 2):4-7.
  • 58 Van den Abbeele AD. GIST Collaborative PET Study Group. F18-FDG-PET provides early evidence of biological response to STI571 in patients with malignant gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2001;20:362a.
  • 59 Demetri GD, von Mehren M, Blanke CD, Van den Abbeele AD, Eisenberg B, Roberts PJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of imatinib mesylate in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors. N Engl J Med 2002;347:472-80.
  • 60 Winton Ed, Heriot AG, Ng M, Hicks RJ, Hogg A, Milner A, et al. The impact of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on the staging, management and outcome of anal cancer.Br J Cancer 2009;100:693-700.
  • 61 Mistrangelo M, Pelosi E, Bellò M, Ricardi U, Milanesi E, Cassoni P, et al. Role of positron emission tomography-computed tomography in the management of anal cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;84:66-72.
  • 62 Nguyen BT, Joon DL, Khoo V, Quong G, Chao M, Wada M, et al. Assessing the impact of FDG-PET in the management of anal cancer. Radiother Oncol 2008;87:376-82.
  • 63 Krengli M, Milia ME, Turri L, Mones E, Bassi MC, Cannillo B, et al. FDG-PET/CT imaging for staging and target volume delineation in conformal radiotherapy of anal carcinoma. Radiat Oncol 2010;5:10.
  • 64 Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009;105:103-4.
  • 65 Magné N, Chargari C, Vicenzi L, Gillion N, Messai T, Magné J, et al. New trends in the evaluation and treatment of cervix cancer: The role of FDG-PET. Cancer Treat Rev 2008;34:671-81.
  • 66 Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:3745-9.
  • 67 Belhocine T, Thille A, Fridman V, Albert A, Seidel L, Nickers P, et al. Contribution of whole-body 18FDG PET imaging in the management of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2002;87:90-7.
  • 68 Lin LL, Yang Z, Mutic S, Miller TR, Grigsby PW. FDG-PET imaging for the assessment of physiologic volume response during radiotherapy in cervix cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:177-81.
  • 69 Wong TZ, Jones EL, Coleman RE. Positron emission tomography with 2-deoxy-2- [(18) F] fluoro- D-glucose for evaluating local and distant disease in patients with cervical cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 2004;6:55-62.
  • 70 Sharma DN, Rath GK, Kumar R, Malhotra A, Kumar S, Pandjatcharam J, et al. Positron emission tomography scan for predicting clinical outcome of patients with recurrent cervical carcinoma following radiation therapy. J Cancer Res Ther 2012;8:23-7.
  • 71 Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Kaji Y, Fukasawa I, Inaba N, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in staging ovarian cancer: Comparison with enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008;35:1912-20.
  • 72 Thrall MM, DeLoia JA, Gallion H, Avril N. Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2007;105:17-22.
  • 73 Takekuma M, Maeda M, Ozawa T, Yasumi K, Torizuka T. Positron emission tomography with 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose for the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 2005;10:177-81.
  • 74 Gu P, Pan LL, Wu SQ, Sun L, Huang G. CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2009;71:164-74.
  • 75 Xu G, Li J, Zuo X, Li C. Comparison of whole body positron emission tomography (PET)/PET-computed tomography and conventional anatomic imaging for detecting distant malignancies in patients with head and neck cancer: A meta-analysis. Laryngoscope 2012;122:1974-8.
  • 76 Xu GZ, Guan DJ, He ZY. (18) FDG-PET/CT for detecting distant metastases and second primary cancers in patients with head and neck cancer. A meta-analysis. Oral Oncol 2011;47:560-5.
  • 77 O′Neill JP, Moynagh M, Kavanagh E, O′Dwyer T. Prospective, blinded trial of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography positron emission tomography in staging primary and recurrent cancer of the head and neck. J Laryngol Otol 2010;124:1274-7.
  • 78 Johnson JT, Branstetter BF 4 th . PET/CT in head and neck oncology: State-of-the-art 2013. Laryngoscope 2014;124:913-5.
  • 79 McDermott M, Hughes M, Rath T, Johnson JT, Heron DE, Kubicek GJ, et al. Negative predictive value of surveillance PET/CT in head and neck squamous cell cancer. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:1632-6.
  • 80 Gupta T, Master Z, Kannan S, Agarwal JP, Ghosh-Laskar S, Rangarajan V, et al. Diagnostic performance of post-treatment FDG PET or FDG PET/CT imaging in head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38:2083-95.
  • 81 Nakamura S, Toriihara A, Okochi K, Watanabe H, Shibuya H, Kurabayashi T. Optimal timing of post-treatment [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT for patients with head and neck malignancy. Nucl Med Commun 2013;34:162-7.
  • 82 Tantiwongkosi B, Yu F, Kanard A, Miller FR. Role of (18) F-FDG PET/CT in pre and post treatment evaluation in head and neck carcinoma. World J Radiol 2014;6:177-91.
  • 83 Rudmik L, Lau HY, Matthews TW, Bosch JD, Kloiber R, Molnar CP, et al. Clinical utility of PET/CT in the evaluation of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with an unknown primary: A prospective clinical trial. Head Neck 2011;33:935-40.
  • 84 Zhu L, Wang N. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography as a diagnostic tool in patients with cervical nodal metastases of unknown primary site: A meta-analysis. Surg Oncol 2013;22:190-4.
  • 85 Dandekar MR, Kannan S, Rangarajan V, Purandare NC, Chaukar DA, Deshmukh A, et al. Utility of PET in unknown primary with cervical metastasis: A retrospective study. Indian J Cancer 2011;48:181-6.
  • 86 Johansen J, Buus S, Loft A, Keiding S, Overgaard M, Hansen HS, et al. Prospective study of 18FDG-PET in the detection and management of patients with lymph node metastases to the neck from an unknown primary tumor. Results from the DAHANCA-13 study. Head Neck 2008;30:471-8.
  • 87 Cooper DS, Doherty GM, Haugen BR, Kloos RT, Lee SL, Mandel SJ, et al.; American Thyroid Association (ATA) Guidelines Taskforce on Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer. Revised American Thyroid Association management guidelines for patients with thyroid nodules and differentiated thyroid cancer. Thyroid 2009;19:1167-214.
  • 88 Kawai N, Miyake K, Yamamoto Y, Nishiyama Y, Tamiya T. 18F-FDG PET in the diagnosis and treatment of primary central nervous system lymphoma. Biomed Res Int 2013;2013:247152.
  • 89 Bradley J, Bae K, Choi N, Forster K, Siegel BA, Brunetti J, et al. A phase II comparative study of gross tumor volume definition with or without PET/CT fusion in dosimetric planning for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Primary analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0515. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;82:435-41.e1.
  • 90 Nestle U, Walter K, Schmidt S, Licht N, Nieder C, Motaref B, et al. 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for the planning of radiotherapy in lung cancer: High impact in patients with atelectasis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;44:593-7.
  • 91 Kligerman S, Digumarthy S. Staging of non-small cell lung cancer using integrated PET/CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:1203-11.
  • 92 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.
  • 93 Gould MK, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, Maclean CC, Demas AN, Shigemitsu H, et al. Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:879-92.
  • 94 Toloza EM, Harpole L, McCrory DC. Noninvasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer: A review of the current evidence. Chest 2003;123(Suppl):137S-46S.
  • 95 Fischer BM, Mortensen J, Højgaard L. Positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer: A systematic, quantitative review. Lancet Oncol 2001;2:659-66.
  • 96 Dwamena BA, Sonnad SS, Angobaldo JO, Wahl RL. Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: Mediastinal staging in the 1990s--meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT. Radiology 1999;213:530-6.
  • 97 Darling GE, Maziak DE, Inculet RI, Gulenchyn KY, Driedger AA, Ung YC, et al. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography compared with invasive mediastinal staging in non-small cell lung cancer: Results of mediastinal staging in the early lung positron emission tomography trial. J Thorac Oncol 2011;6:1367-72.
  • 98 Silvestri GA, Gonzalez AV, Jantz MA, Margolis ML, Gould MK, Tanoue LT, et al. Methods for staging non-small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3 rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2013;143(Suppl):e211-50S.
  • 99 Sahiner I, Vural GU. Positron emission tomography/computerized tomography in lung cancer. Quant Imaging Med Surg 2014;4:195-206.
  • 100 Schrevens L, Lorent N, Dooms C, Vansteenkiste J. The role of PET scan in diagnosis, staging, and management of non-small cell lung cancer. Oncologist 2004;9:633-43.
  • 101 Brady MJ, Thomas J, Wong TZ, Franklin KM, Ho LM, Paulson EK. Adrenal nodules at FDG PET/CT in patients known to have or suspected of having lung cancer: A proposal for an efficient diagnostic algorithm. Radiology 2009;250:523-30.
  • 102 Cho AR, Lim I, Na II, Choe du H, Park JY, Kim BI, et al. Evaluation of adrenal masses in lung cancer patients using F-18 FDG PET/CT. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;45:52-8.
  • 103 Qu X, Huang X, Yan W, Wu L, Dai K. A meta-analysis of 18 FDG-PET-CT, 18 FDG-PET, MRI and bone scintigraphy for diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:1007-15.
  • 104 Pommier P, Touboul E, Chabaud S, Dussart S, Le Pechoux C, Giammarile F, et al. Impact of (18) F-FDG PET on treatment strategy and 3D radiotherapy planning in non-small cell lung cancer: A prospective multicenter study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:350-5.
  • 105 Mac Manus MP, Hicks RJ, Matthews JP, McKenzie A, Rischin D, Salminen EK, et al. Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography scanning for response-assessment after radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1285-92.
  • 106 Hellwig D, Gröschel A, Graeter TP, Hellwig AP, Nestle U, Schäfers HJ, et al. Diagnostic performance and prognostic impact of FDG-PET in suspected recurrence of surgically treated non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:13-21.
  • 107 Brink I, Schumacher T, Mix M, Ruhland S, Stoelben E, Digel W, et al. Impact of [18F] FDG-PET on the primary staging of small-cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:1614-20.
  • 108 Fischer BM, Mortensen J, Langer SW, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Petersen BI, et al. A prospective study of PET/CT in initial staging of small-cell lung cancer: Comparison with CT, bone scintigraphy and bone marrow analysis. Ann Oncol 2007;18:338-45.
  • 109 Kamel EM, Zwahlen D, Wyss MT, Stumpe KD, von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC. Whole-body (18) F-FDG PET improves the management of patients with small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1911-7.
  • 110 Duysinx B, Nguyen D, Louis R, Cataldo D, Belhocine T, Bartsch P, et al. Evaluation of pleural disease with 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging. Chest 2004;125:489-93.
  • 111 Yildirim H, Metintas M, Entok E, Ak G, Ak I, Dundar E, et al. Clinical value of fluoro deoxyglucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography in differentiation of malignant mesothelioma from asbestos-related benign pleural disease: An observational pilot study. J Thorac Oncol 2009;4:1480-4.
  • 112 Plathow C, Staab A, Schmaehl A, Aschoff P, Zuna I, Pfannenberg C, et al. Computed tomography, positron emission tomography, positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging for staging of limited pleural mesothelioma: Initial results. Invest Radiol 2008;43:737-44.
  • 113 Ambrosini V, Rubello D, Nanni C, Farsad M, Castellucci P, Franchi R, et al. Additional value of hybrid PET/CT fusion imaging vs. conventional CT scan alone in the staging and management of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur 2005;8:111-5.
  • 114 Sung YM, Lee KS, Kim BT, Choi JY, Shim YM, Yi CA. 18F-FDG PET/CT of thymic epithelial tumors: Usefulness for distinguishing and staging tumor subgroups. J Nucl Med 2006;47:1628-34.
  • 115 Endo M, Nakagawa K, Ohde Y, Okumura T, Kondo H, Igawa S, et al. Utility of 18FDG-PET for differentiating the grade of malignancy in thymic epithelial tumors. Lung Cancer 2008;61:350-5.
  • 116 Kaira K, Sunaga N, Ishizuka T, Shimizu K, Yamamoto N. The role of [ 18 F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in thymic epithelial tumors. Cancer Imaging 2011;11:195-201.
  • 117 Otsuka H. The utility of FDG-PET in the diagnosis of thymic epithelial tumors. J Med Invest 2012;59:225-34.
  • 118 Puli SR, Reddy JB, Bechtold ML, Antillon D, Ibdah JA, Antillon MR. Staging accuracy of esophageal cancer by endoscopic ultrasound: A meta-analysis and systematic review. World J Gastroenterol 2008;14:1479-90.
  • 119 Kato H, Miyazaki T, Nakajima M, Takita J, Kimura H, Faried A, et al. The incremental effect of positron emission tomography on diagnostic accuracy in the initial staging of esophageal carcinoma. Cancer 2005;103:148-56.
  • 120 Roedl JB, Blake MA, Holalkere NS, Mueller PR, Colen RR, Harisinghani MG. Lymph node staging in esophageal adenocarcinomas with PET-CT based on a visual analysis and based on metabolic parameters. Abdom Imaging 2009;34:610-7.
  • 121 vanWestreenen HL, Heeren PA, van Dullemen HM, van der Jagt EJ, Jager PL, Groen H, et al. Positron emission tomography with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in a combined staging strategy of esophageal cancer prevents unnecessary surgical explorations. J Gastrointest Surg 2005;9:54-61.
  • 122 Duong CP, Demitriou H, Weih L, Thompson A, Williams D, Thomas RJ, et al. Significant clinical impact and prognostic stratification provided by FDG-PET in the staging of oesophageal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:759-69.
  • 123 Purandare NC, Pramesh CS, Karimundackal G, Jiwnani S, Agrawal A, Shah S, et al. Incremental value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in therapeutic decision-making of potentially curable esophageal adenocarcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 2014;35:864-9.
  • 124 Kato H, Kuwano H, Nakajima M, Miyazaki T, Yoshikawa M, Masuda N, et al. Usefulness of positron emission tomography for assessing the response of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with esophageal cancer. Am J Surg 2002;184:279-83.
  • 125 Salminen E, Hogg A, Binns D, Frydenberg M, Hicks R. Investigations with FDG-PET scanning in prostate cancer show limited value for clinical practice. Acta Oncol 2002;41:425-9.
  • 126 Jadvar H. Molecular imaging of prostate cancer with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET. Nat Rev Urol 2009;6:317-23.
  • 127 Minamimoto R, Uemura H, Sano F, Terao H, Nagashima Y, Yamanaka S, et al. The potential of FDG-PET/CT for detecting prostate cancer in patients with an elevated serum PSA level. Ann Nucl Med 2011;25:21-7.
  • 128 Shiiba M, Ishihara K, Kimura G, Kuwako T, Yoshihara H, Sato H, et al. Evaluation of primary prostate cancer using 11C-methionine-PET/CT and 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Ann Nucl Med 2012;26:138-45.
  • 129 Wang HY, Ding HJ, Chen JH, Chao CH, Lu YY, Lin WY, et al. Meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of [18F] FDG-PET and PET/CT in renal cell carcinoma. Cancer Imaging 2012;12:464-74.
  • 130 Anjos DA, Etchebehere EC, Ramos CD, Santos AO, Albertotti C, Camargo EE. 18F-FDG PET/CT delayed images after diuretic for restaging invasive bladder cancer. J Nucl Med 2007;48:764-70.
  • 131 Harkirat S, Anand S, Jacob M. Forced diuresis and dual-phase F-fluorodeoxyglucose- PET/CT scan for restaging of urinary bladder cancers. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2010;20:13-9.
  • 132 Lu YY, Chen JH, Liang JA, Wang HY, Lin CC, Lin WY, et al. Clinical value of FDG PET or PET/CT in urinary bladder cancer: A systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:2411-6.
  • 133 De Santis M, Becherer A, Bokemeyer C, Stoiber F, Oechsle K, Sellner F, et al. 2-18fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is a reliable predictor for viable tumor in postchemotherapy seminoma: An update of the prospective multicentric SEMPET trial. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:1034-9.
  • 134 Zhao JY, Ma XL, Li YY, Zhang BL, Li MM, Ma XL, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG-PET in patients with testicular cancer: A meta-analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014;15:3525-31.
  • 135 Müller J, Schrader AJ, Jentzmik F, Schrader M. Assessment of residual tumours after systemic treatment of metastatic seminoma: 18 F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography-meta-analysis of diagnostic value. Urologe A 2011;50:322-7.
  • 136 Kollmannsberger C, Oechsle K, Dohmen BM, Pfannenberg A, Bares R, Claussen CD, et al. Prospective comparison of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with conventional assessment by computed tomography scans and serum tumor markers for the evaluation of residual masses in patients with nonseminomatous germ cell carcinoma. Cancer 2002;94:2353-62.
  • 137 Gu H, Xu W, Song X, Dai D, Zhu L, Wang J. Diagnostic value of (18) F-fluoro deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for N-and M-staging of malignant melanoma. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2014;94:1309-12.
  • 138 Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Shields AF, Liu D, Gareen IF, Hanna L, et al. The impact of positron emission tomography (PET) on expected management during cancer treatment: Findings of the National Oncologic PET Registry. Cancer 2009;115:410-8.
  • 139 Tunis S, Whicher D. The National Oncologic PET Registry: Lessons learned for coverage with evidence development. J Am Coll Radiol 2009;6:360-5.