The prognostic value of preoperative FDG-PET/CT metabolic parameters in cervical cancer patients
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Akkas BE, Demirel BB, Dizman A, Vural GU (2013) Do clinical characteristics and metabolic markers detected on positron emission tomography/computerized tomography associate with persistent disease in patients with in-operable cervical cancer? Ann Nucl Med 27(8):756–763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-013-0745-1
Balleyguier C, Sala E, Da Cunha T et al (2011) Staging of uterine cervical cancer with MRI: guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology. Eur Radiol 21(5):1102–1110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1998-x
Beiderwellen K, Huebner M, Heusch P et al (2014) Whole-body [18F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT in the assessment of bone lesions in oncological patients: initial results. Eur Radiol 24(8):2023–2030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3229-3
Benedet JL, Bender H, Jones H, Ngan HY, Pecorelli S (2000) FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. FIGO committee on gynecologic oncology. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 70(2):209–262. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11041682 . Accessed 19 Feb 2017
Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJG et al (2015) FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42(2):328–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-014-2961-x
Bollineni VR, Kramer G, Liu Y, Melidis C, deSouza NM (2015) A literature review of the association between diffusion-weighted MRI derived apparent diffusion coefficient and tumour aggressiveness in pelvic cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 41(6):496–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.03.010
Brandmaier P, Purz S, Bremicker K, et al. Simultaneous [18F]FDG-PET/MRI: correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and standardized uptake value (SUV) in primary and recurrent cervical Cancer. Bathen TF, ed. PLoS One 2015;10(11):e0141684. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141684
Choi HJ, Kim SH, Seo S-S et al (2006) MRI for pretreatment lymph node staging in uterine cervical Cancer. Am J Roentgenol 187(5):W538–W543. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.0263
Chong GO, Jeong SY, Park S-H et al (2015) Comparison of the prognostic value of F-18 pet metabolic parameters of primary tumors and regional lymph nodes in patients with locally advanced cervical Cancer who are treated with concurrent Chemoradiotherapy. PLoS One 10(9):e0137743. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0137743 Li JJ, ed
Chung HH, Kim JW, Han KH et al (2011) Prognostic value of metabolic tumor volume measured by FDG-PET/CT in patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 120(2):270–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.11.002
Cibula D, Pötter R, Raspollini MR. ESGO-ESTRO-ESP guidelines on the management of invasive cervical cancer. 2017. https://guidelines.esgo.org/media/2018/04/ESGO_Cervical-Cancer_A6.pdf
Crivellaro C, Signorelli M, Guerra L et al (2012) 18F-FDG PET/CT can predict nodal metastases but not recurrence in early stage uterine cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.06.041
Grueneisen J, Beiderwellen K, Heusch P et al (2014) Correlation of standardized uptake value and apparent diffusion coefficient in integrated whole-body PET/MRI of primary and recurrent cervical Cancer. PLoS One 9(5):e96751. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0096751 Hoffmann A-C, ed
Ho K-C, Lin G, Wang J-J, Lai C-H, Chang C-J, Yen T-C (2009) Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficients measured by 3T diffusion-weighted MRI and SUV from FDG PET/CT in primary cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36(2):200–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0936-5
Hong JH, Min KJ, Lee JK et al (2016) Prognostic value of the sum of metabolic tumor volume of primary tumor and lymph nodes using 18F-FDG PET/CT in patients with cervical Cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002992
Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al (2011) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2008. National Cancer Institut, Bethesda. https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2008/ . Accessed 26 Mar 2013
Kallehauge JF, Tanderup K, Haack S et al (2010) Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) as a quantitative parameter in diffusion weighted MR imaging in gynecologic cancer: dependence on b-values used. Acta Oncol (Madr) 49(7):1017–1022. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2010.500305
Kitajima K, Suenaga Y, Ueno Y et al (2014) Fusion of PET and MRI for staging of uterine cervical cancer: comparison with contrast-enhanced 18 F-FDG PET/CT and pelvic MRI. Clin Imaging 38(4):464–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinimag.2014.02.006
Lai AYT, Perucho JAU, Xu X, Hui ES, Lee EYP (2017) Concordance of FDG PET/CT metabolic tumour volume versus DW-MRI functional tumour volume with T2-weighted anatomical tumour volume in cervical cancer. BMC Cancer 17(1):825. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3800-9
Le Bihan D (2013) Apparent diffusion coefficient and beyond: what diffusion MR imaging can tell us about tissue structure. Radiology 268(2):318–322. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13130420
Lucia F, Visvikis D, Desseroit M-C et al (2018) Prediction of outcome using pretreatment 18F-FDG PET/CT and MRI radiomics in locally advanced cervical cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 45(5):768–786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3898-7
Lv K, Guo H, Lu Y, Wu Z, Zhang K, Han J (2014) Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detecting pelvic lymph-node metastases in patients with early-stage uterine cervical cancer. Nucl Med Commun 35(12):1204–1211. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000000198
McVeigh PZ, Syed AM, Milosevic M, Fyles A, Haider MA (2008) Diffusion-weighted MRI in cervical cancer. Eur Radiol 18(5):1058–1064. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0843-3
Miccò M, Vargas HA, Burger IA et al (2014) Combined pre-treatment MRI and 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters as prognostic biomarkers in patients with cervical cancer. Eur J Radiol 83(7):1169–1176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.03.024
Mirpour S, Mhlanga JC, Logeswaran P, Russo G, Mercier G, Subramaniam RM (2013) The role of PET/CT in the Management of Cervical Cancer. Am J Roentgenol 201(2):W192–W205. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.9830
Nakajo K, Tatsumi M, Inoue A et al (2010) Diagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging fusion images of gynecological malignant tumors: comparison with positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Jpn J Radiol 28(2):95–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-009-0387-3
Nakamura K, Joja I, Nagasaka T et al (2012) The mean apparent diffusion coefficient value (ADCmean) on primary cervical cancer is a predictive marker for disease recurrence. Gynecol Oncol 127(3):478–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.07.123
Queiroz MA, Kubik-Huch RA, Hauser N et al (2015) PET/MRI and PET/CT in advanced gynaecological tumours: initial experience and comparison. Eur Radiol 25(8):2222–2230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3657-8
RSM L, Ramdave S, Beech P et al (2016) Utility of SUVmax on 18 F-FDG PET in detecting cervical nodal metastases. Cancer Imaging 16(1):39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-016-0095-z
Sarabhai T, Schaarschmidt BM, Wetter A et al (2018) Comparison of 18F-FDG PET/MRI and MRI for pre-therapeutic tumor staging of patients with primary cancer of the uterine cervix. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 45(1):67–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3809-y
Sironi S, Buda A, Picchio M et al (2006) Lymph node metastasis in patients with clinical early-stage cervical Cancer: detection with integrated FDG PET/CT. Radiology 238(1):272–279. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2381041799