Download PDF
Der Nuklearmediziner 2016; 39(04): 279-286
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-113844
Neurobildgebung
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Aminosäure-PET bei Hirntumoren

Amino Acid PET in Brain Tumors
K.-J. Langen
1   Institut für Neurowissenschaften und Medizin, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich
2   Klinik für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen
,
N. Galldiks
1   Institut für Neurowissenschaften und Medizin, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich
3   Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
14 December 2016 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

In der Hirntumordiagnostik hat die PET mit radioaktiv markierten Aminosäuren in den letzten Jahren zunehmend an Bedeutung gewonnen und ist in vielen Zentren bereits als ergänzendes Diagnoseverfahren neben der MRT etabliert. Die Aminosäure-PET bietet wichtige Zusatzinformationen bei der diagnostischen Zuordnung unklarer zerebraler Raumforderungen und eine verbesserte Darstellung der Tumorausdehnung von zerebralen Gliomen, welche bei der Planung einer Biopsie, eines neurochirurgischen Eingriffs und einer Bestrahlung wichtige Hilfestellung bieten kann. Des Weiteren können prognostische Informationen gewonnen werden, ein Tumorprogress oder -rezidiv besser von unspezifischen posttherapeutischen Veränderungen in der MRT differenziert werden sowie Therapieeffekte zuverlässiger und frühzeitiger als mit der MRT beurteilt werden.

Abstract

PET using radiolabelled amino acids has gained increasing interest in the diagnostics of brain tumors in the last years and has been established in many neurooncological centers as a complementary diagnostic tool to MRI. Amino acid PET offers important additional information in the diagnosis of unclear space-occupying brain lesions and an improved delineation of tumor extent of cerebral gliomas which is helpful for biopsy guidance, planning of surgery and radiation therapy. Furthermore, amino acid imaging may provide prognostic information, helps to differentiate tumor progression and recurrence from unspecific posttherapeutic changes in the tissue and to detect the metabolic response during tumor therapy earlier than with conventional MRI.

Schlüsselwörter

PET - Hirntumoren - Hirnmetastasen - FDG - Aminosäuren - FET - FDOPA

Key words

PET - brain tumors - brain metastases - FDG - amino acids - FET - FDOPA
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Albert NL, Weller M, Suchorska B et al. Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology working group and European Association for Neuro-Oncology recommendations for the clinical use of PET imaging in gliomas. Neuro Oncol 2016; 18: 1199-1208
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Albert NL, Winkelmann I, Suchorska B et al. Early static (18)F-FET-PET scans have a higher accuracy for glioma grading than the standard 20–40 min scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43: 1105-1114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Basu S, Alavi A. Molecular imaging (PET) of brain tumors. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2009; 19: 625-646
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Brandsma D, van den Bent MJ. Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse in the treatment of gliomas. Curr Opin Neurol 2009; 22: 633-638
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Buchmann N, Klasner B, Gempt J et al. (18)F-Fluoroethyl-L-Thyrosine positron emission tomography to delineate tumor residuals after glioblastoma resection: A comparison with standard postoperative magnetic resonance imaging. World Neurosurg 2016; 89: 420-426
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Calcagni ML, Galli G, Giordano A et al. Dynamic O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (F-18 FET) PET for glioma grading: assessment of individual probability of malignancy. Clin Nucl Med 2011; 36: 841-847
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Chen W. Clinical applications of PET in brain tumors. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 1468-1481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cicone F, Filss CP, Minniti G et al. Volumetric assessment of recurrent or progressive gliomas: comparison between F-DOPA PET and perfusion-weighted MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 905-915
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Cicone F, Minniti G, Romano A et al. Accuracy of F-DOPA PET and perfusion-MRI for differentiating radionecrotic from progressive brain metastases after radiosurgery. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 103-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Collet S, Valable S, Constans JM et al. [(18)F]-fluoro-L-thymidine PET and advanced MRI for preoperative grading of gliomas. Neuroimage Clin 2015; 8: 448-454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dhermain FG, Hau P, Lanfermann H et al. Advanced MRI and PET imaging for assessment of treatment response in patients with gliomas. Lancet Neurol 2010; 9: 906-920
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dunet V, Pomoni A, Hottinger A et al. Performance of 18F-FET versus 18F-FDG-PET for the diagnosis and grading of brain tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuro Oncol 2016; 18: 426-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Floeth FW, Pauleit D, Sabel M et al. Prognostic value of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET and MRI in low-grade glioma. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 519-527
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Kracht LW et al. Volumetry of [(1)(1)C]-methionine positron emission tomographic uptake as a prognostic marker before treatment of patients with malignant glioma. Mol Imaging 2012; 11: 516-527
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Stoffels G et al. Diagnosis of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma using O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 685-695
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Galldiks N, Filss CP, Goldbrunner R et al. Discrepant MR and [(18)F]Fluoroethyl-L-Tyrosine PET imaging findings in a patient with bevacizumab failure. Case Rep Oncol 2012; 5: 490-494
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Galldiks N, Kracht LW, Burghaus L et al. Use of 11C-methionine PET to monitor the effects of temozolomide chemotherapy in malignant gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33: 516-524
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Galldiks N, Kracht LW, Burghaus L et al. Patient-tailored, imaging-guided, long-term temozolomide chemotherapy in patients with glioblastoma. Mol Imaging 2010; 9: 40-46
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Galldiks N, Langen K, Holy R et al. Assessment of treatment response in patients with glioblastoma using [18F]Fluoroethyl-L-Tyrosine PET in comparison to MRI. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 1048-1057
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Galldiks N, Langen KJ. Applications of PET imaging of neurological tumors with radiolabeled amino acids. Q J Nucl Med Mol Im 2015; 59: 70-82
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Galldiks N, Langen KJ, Pope WB. From the clinician’s point of view – What is the status quo of positron emission tomography in patients with brain tumors?. Neuro Oncol 2015; 17: 1434-1444
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Filss C et al. The use of dynamic O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET in the diagnosis of patients with progressive and recurrent glioma. Neuro Oncol 2015; 1293-1300
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Filss CP et al. Role of O-(2-18F-Fluoroethyl)-L-Tyrosine PET for differentiation of local recurrent brain metastasis from radiation necrosis. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 1367-1374
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Ruge MI et al. Role of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET as a diagnostic tool for detection of malignant progression in patients with low-grade glioma. J Nucl Med 2013; 54: 2046-2054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Giovannini E, Lazzeri P, Milano A et al. Clinical applications of choline PET/CT in brain tumors. Curr Pharm Design 2015; 21: 121-127
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Grosu AL, Weber WA. PET for radiation treatment planning of brain tumours. Radiother Oncol 2010; 96: 325-327
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Habermeier A, Graf J, Sandhofer BF et al. System L amino acid transporter LAT1 accumulates O-(2-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET). Amino acids 2015; 47: 335-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hamacher K, Coenen HH. Efficient routine production of the 18F-labelled amino acid O-2-18F fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine. Appl Radiat Isot 2002; 57: 853-856
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hatakeyama T, Kawai N, Nishiyama Y et al. 11C-methionine (MET) and 18F-fluorothymidine (FLT) PET in patients with newly diagnosed glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35: 2009-2017
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Hellwig D, Ketter R, Romeike BF et al. Prospective study of p-[123I]iodo-L-phenylalanine and SPECT for the evaluation of newly diagnosed cerebral lesions: specific confirmation of glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37: 2344-2353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Herholz K, Coope D, Jackson A. Metabolic and molecular imaging in neuro-oncology. Lancet Neurol 2007; 6: 711-724
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Herholz K, Holzer T, Bauer B et al. 11C-methionine PET for differential diagnosis of low-grade gliomas. Neurology 1998; 50: 1316-1322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hirata K, Terasaka S, Shiga T et al. (1)(8)F-Fluoromisonidazole positron emission tomography may differentiate glioblastoma multiforme from less malignant gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39: 760-770
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Hutterer M, Nowosielski M, Putzer D et al. O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET predicts failure of antiangiogenic treatment in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma. J Nucl Med 2011; 52: 856-864
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Hutterer MGN, Hau P, Langen KJ. Pitfalls of [F18]-FET PET in the Diagnostics of Brain Tumors. Der Nuklearmediziner 2015; 38: 1-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Jansen NL, Graute V, Armbruster L et al. MRI-suspected low-grade glioma: is there a need to perform dynamic FET PET?. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39: 1021-1029
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Jansen NL, Suchorska B, Wenter V et al. Prognostic Significance of Dynamic 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed astrocytic High-Grade Glioma. J Nucl Med 2015; 56: 9-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Jensen P, Feng L, Law I et al. TSPO imaging in glioblastoma multiforme: A direct comparison between 123I-CLINDE SPECT, 18F-FET PET, and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. J Nucl Med 2015; 56: 1386-1390
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Karunanithi S, Sharma P, Kumar A et al. 18F-FDOPA PET/CT for detection of recurrence in patients with glioma: prospective comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40: 1025-1035
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Kobayashi H, Hirata K, Yamaguchi S et al. Usefulness of FMISO-PET for glioma analysis. Neurol Med Chir 2013; 53: 773-778
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Kracht LW, Miletic H, Busch S et al. Delineation of brain tumor extent with [11C]L-methionine positron emission tomography: local comparison with stereotactic histopathology. Clin Cancer Res 2004; 10: 7163-7170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Kratochwil C, Combs SE, Leotta K et al. Intra-individual comparison of (1)(8)F-FET and (1)(8)F-DOPA in PET imaging of recurrent brain tumors. Neuro Oncol 2014; 16: 434-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Kunz M, Thon N, Eigenbrod S et al. Hot spots in dynamic (18)FET-PET delineate malignant tumor parts within suspected WHO grade II gliomas. Neuro Oncol 2011; 13: 307-316
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Langen KJ, Hamacher K, Weckesser M et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine: uptake mechanisms and clinical applications. Nucl Med Biol 2006; 33: 287-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Langen KJ, Pauleit D, Coenen HH. 3-[(123)I]Iodo-alpha-methyl-L-tyrosine: uptake mechanisms and clinical applications. Nucl Med Biol 2002; 29: 625-631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Langen KJ, Watts C. Neuro-oncology: Amino acid PET for brain tumours – ready for the clinic?. Nat Rev Neurol 2016; 12: 357-376
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Levivier M, Massager N, Wikler D et al. Use of stereotactic PET images in dosimetry planning of radiosurgery for brain tumors: clinical experience and proposed classification. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 1146-1154
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Lizarraga KJ, Allen-Auerbach M, Czernin J et al. (18)F-FDOPA PET for differentiating recurrent or progressive brain metastatic tumors from late or delayed radiation injury after radiation treatment. J Nucl Med 2014; 55: 30-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Lopez WO, Cordeiro JG, Albicker U et al. Correlation of (18)F-fluoroethyl tyrosine positron-emission tomography uptake values and histomorphological findings by stereotactic serial biopsy in newly diagnosed brain tumors using a refined software tool. Onco Targets Ther 2015; 8: 3803-3815
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Manabe O, Hattori N, Yamaguchi S et al. Oligodendroglial component complicates the prediction of tumour grading with metabolic imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 896-904
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Minamimoto R, Saginoya T, Kondo C et al. Differentiation of Brain Tumor Recurrence from Post-Radiotherapy Necrosis with 11C-Methionine PET: Visual Assessment versus Quantitative Assessment. PloS one 2015; 10: e0132515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Mosskin M, Ericson K, Hindmarsh T et al. Positron emission tomography compared with magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in supratentorial gliomas using multiple stereotactic biopsies as reference. Acta Radiol 1989; 30: 225-232
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Moulin-Romsee G, D‘Hondt E, de Groot T et al Non-invasive grading of brain tumours using dynamic amino acid PET imaging: does it work for 11C-methionine?. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007; 34: 2082-2087
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Munck Af Rosenschold P, Costa J, Engelholm SA et al. Impact of [18F]-fluoro-ethyl-tyrosine PET imaging on target definition for radiation therapy of high-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol 2015; 17: 757-763
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Nayak L, Lee EQ, Wen PY. Epidemiology of brain metastases. Curr Oncol Rep 2012; 14: 48-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Nihashi T, Dahabreh IJ, Terasawa T. Diagnostic accuracy of PET for recurrent glioma diagnosis: a meta-analysis. Am J Neuroradiol 2013; 34: 944-950 S941-S911
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Nowosielski M, DiFranco MD, Putzer D et al. An intra-individual comparison of MRI, [18F]-FET and [18F]-FLT PET in patients with high-grade gliomas. PloS one 2014; 9: e95830
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Nyuyki F, Plotkin M, Graf R et al. Potential impact of (68)Ga-DOTATOC PET/CT on stereotactic radiotherapy planning of meningiomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37: 310-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Ohtani T, Kurihara H, Ishiuchi S et al. Brain tumour imaging with carbon-11 choline: comparison with FDG PET and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Eur J Nucl Med 2001; 28: 1664-1670
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Liao P et al. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2007–2011. Neuro Oncol 2014; 16 (Suppl. 04) iv1-iv63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Padma MV, Said S, Jacobs M et al. Prediction of pathology and survival by FDG PET in gliomas. J Neuro-Oncol 2003; 64: 227-237
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Pauleit D, Floeth F, Hamacher K et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET combined with MRI improves the diagnostic assessment of cerebral gliomas. Brain 2005; 128: 678-687
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Pauleit D, Langen KJ, Floeth F et al. Can the apparent diffusion coefficient be used as a noninvasive parameter to distinguish tumor tissue from peritumoral tissue in cerebral gliomas?. J Magn Reson Imaging 2004; 20: 758-764
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Pauleit D, Stoffels G, Bachofner A et al. Comparison of (18)F-FET and (18)F-FDG PET in brain tumors. Nucl Med Biol 2009; 36: 779-787
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Piroth MD, Holy R, Pinkawa M et al. Prognostic impact of postoperative, pre-irradiation (18)F-fluoroethyl-l-tyrosine uptake in glioblastoma patients treated with radiochemotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2011; 99: 218-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Piroth MD, Pinkawa M, Holy R et al. Prognostic value of early [18F]fluoroethyltyrosine positron emission tomography after radiochemotherapy in glioblastoma multiforme. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2011; 80: 176-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Piroth MD, Pinkawa M, Holy R et al. Integrated boost IMRT with FET-PET-adapted local dose escalation in glioblastomas. Results of a prospective phase II study. Strahlenther Onkol 2012; 188: 334-339
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Pirotte B, Goldman S, Massager N et al. Combined use of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose and 11C-methionine in 45 positron emission tomography-guided stereotactic brain biopsies. J Neurosurg 2004; 101: 476-483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Pirotte BJ, Levivier M, Goldman S et al. Positron emission tomography-guided volumetric resection of supratentorial high-grade gliomas: a survival analysis in 66 consecutive patients. Neurosurgery 2009; 64: 471-481 discussion 481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Plotkin M, Blechschmidt C, Auf G et al. Comparison of F-18 FET-PET with F-18 FDG-PET for biopsy planning of non-contrast-enhancing gliomas. Eur Radiol 2010; 20: 2496-2502
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Popperl G, Goldbrunner R, Gildehaus FJ et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET for monitoring the effects of convection-enhanced delivery of paclitaxel in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 1018-1025
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Popperl G, Gotz C, Rachinger W et al. Value of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)- L-tyrosine PET for the diagnosis of recurrent glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 1464-1470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Popperl G, Kreth FW, Mehrkens JH et al. FET PET for the evaluation of untreated gliomas: correlation of FET uptake and uptake kinetics with tumour grading. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007; 34: 1933-1942
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Prieto E, Marti-Climent JM, Dominguez-Prado I et al. Voxel-based analysis of dual-time-point 18F-FDG PET images for brain tumor identification and delineation. J Nucl Med 2011; 52: 865-872
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Pyka T, Gempt J, Hiob D et al. Textural analysis of pre-therapeutic [18F]-FET-PET and its correlation with tumor grade and patient survival in high-grade gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 43: 133-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Pöpperl G, Götz C, Rachinger W et al. Serial O-(2-[(18)F]fluoroethyl)-L:-tyrosine PET for monitoring the effects of intracavitary radioimmunotherapy in patients with malignant glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33: 792-800
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Rapp M, Heinzel A, Galldiks N et al. Diagnostic performance of 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed cerebral lesions suggestive of glioma. J Nucl Med 2013; 54: 229-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Ribom D, Eriksson A, Hartman M et al. Positron emission tomography (11)C-methionine and survival in patients with low-grade gliomas. Cancer 2001; 92: 1541-1549
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Ricci PE, Karis JP, Heiserman JE et al. Differentiating recurrent tumor from radiation necrosis: time for re-evaluation of positron emission tomography?. Am J Neuroradiol 1998; 19: 407-413
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Rickhey M, Koelbl O, Eilles C et al. A biologically adapted dose-escalation approach, demonstrated for 18F-FET-PET in brain tumors. Strahlenther Onkol 2008; 184: 536-542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Rieken S, Habermehl D, Giesel FL et al. Analysis of FET-PET imaging for target volume definition in patients with gliomas treated with conformal radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol 2013; 109: 487-492
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Salber D, Stoffels G, Pauleit D et al. Differential uptake of [18F]FET and [3H]l-methionine in focal cortical ischemia. Nucl Med Biol 2006; 33: 1029-1035
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Salber D, Stoffels G, Pauleit D et al. Differential uptake of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine, L-3H-methionine, and 3H-deoxyglucose in brain abscesses. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 2056-2062
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Santra A, Kumar R, Sharma P et al. F-18 FDG PET-CT in patients with recurrent glioma: comparison with contrast enhanced MRI. Eur J Radiol 2012; 81: 508-513
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Schillaci O, Filippi L, Manni C et al. Single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography in brain tumors. Semin Nucl Med 2007; 37: 34-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Schwarzenberg J, Czernin J, Cloughesy TF et al. Treatment Response Evaluation Using 18F-FDOPA PET in Patients with Recurrent Malignant Glioma on Bevacizumab Therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2014; 20: 3550-3559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Smits A, Baumert BG. The Clinical Value of PET with Amino Acid Tracers for Gliomas WHO Grade II. Int J Mol Imaging 2011; 2011: 372509
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Smits A, Westerberg E, Ribom D. Adding 11C-methionine PET to the EORTC prognostic factors in grade 2 gliomas. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2008; 35: 65-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Sollini M, Sghedoni R, Erba PA et al. Diagnostic performances of [18f] fluorocholine positron emission tomography in brain tumors. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015 [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMed
  • 90 Stadlbauer A, Prante O, Nimsky C et al. Metabolic imaging of cerebral gliomas: spatial correlation of changes in O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET and proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 721-729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Stockhammer F, Plotkin M, Amthauer H et al. Correlation of F-18-fluoro-ethyl-tyrosin uptake with vascular and cell density in non-contrast-enhancing gliomas. J Neuro-Oncol 2008; 88: 205-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Suchorska B, Jansen NL, Linn J et al. Biological tumor volume in 18FET-PET before radiochemotherapy correlates with survival in GBM. Neurology 2015; 84: 710-719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 93 Swissmedic. Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products. Journal Swissmedic 2014; 13: 651
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 94 Terakawa Y, Tsuyuguchi N, Iwai Y et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 11C-methionine PET for differentiation of recurrent brain tumors from radiation necrosis after radiotherapy. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 694-699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Thon N, Kunz M, Lemke L et al. Dynamic F-FET PET in suspected WHO grade II gliomas defines distinct biological subgroups with different clinical courses. Int J Cancer 2015; 136: 2132-2145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 96 Tripathi M, Sharma R, Varshney R et al. Comparison of F-18 FDG and C-11 methionine PET/CT for the evaluation of recurrent primary brain tumors. Clin Nucl Med 2012; 37: 158-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 97 Tsuyuguchi N, Sunada I, Iwai Y et al. Methionine positron emission tomography of recurrent metastatic brain tumor and radiation necrosis after stereotactic radiosurgery: is a differential diagnosis possible?. J Neurosurg 2003; 98: 1056-1064
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 98 Unterrainer M, Schweisthal F, Suchorska B et al. Serial 18F-FET PET imaging of primarily 18F-FET-negative glioma – does it make sense? J Nucl Med. 2016; 57: 1177-1182
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 99 Weber DC, Zilli T, Buchegger F et al. [(18)F]Fluoroethyltyrosine- positron emission tomography-guided radiotherapy for high-grade glioma. Radiat Oncol 2008; 3: 44
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 100 Weckesser M, Langen KJ, Rickert CH et al. O-(2-[18F]fluorethyl)-L-tyrosine PET in the clinical evaluation of primary brain tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32: 422-429
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 101 Weller M, van den Bent M, Hopkins K et al. EANO guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of anaplastic gliomas and glioblastoma. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15: e395-e403
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 102 Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 1963-1972
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 103 Wester HJ, Herz M, Weber W et al. Synthesis and radiopharmacology of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine for tumor imaging. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 205-212
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 104 Winkeler A, Boisgard R, Awde AR et al. The translocator protein ligand [(1)(8)F]DPA-714 images glioma and activated microglia in vivo. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2012; 39: 811-823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 105 Wyss MT, Hofer S, Hefti M et al. Spatial heterogeneity of low-grade gliomas at the capillary level: a PET study on tumor blood flow and amino acid uptake. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 1047-1052
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 106 Yoon JH, Kim JH, Kang WJ et al. Grading of cerebral glioma with multiparametric MR imaging and 18F-FDG-PET: concordance and accuracy. Eur Radiol 2014; 24: 380-389
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar