| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | RSS | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||
Continuing Education |
1 Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
During the past decade the clinical value of PET imaging has been investigated for many different tumors. As knowledge of the advantages and limitations of this modality increased, PET has gained acceptance in tumor imaging. 18F-FDG PET is now successfully used and approved for procedure reimbursement in many types of cancer—for example, lung cancer, melanoma, lymphoma, head and neck tumors, brain tumors, esophageal cancer, and colorectal cancer. In osteosarcoma, the introduction of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has dramatically improved survival rates, thus changing the demands for state-of-the-art imaging to provide detailed information on tumor staging and grading, evaluating treatment, and detecting recurrences. In this review, the available literature on PET imaging in osteosarcoma patients is critically summarized with respect to diagnosis, staging, therapy monitoring, and follow-up focusing on the clinically used tracers 18F-FDG and 18F-fluoride ion. Potential and probable indications are outlined. Because of the relatively small number of patients enrolled in clinical trials published to date, further research needs to be done in larger, prospective patient series to determine the full utility of PET in osteosarcoma.
Key Words: osteosarcoma • 18F-FDG • 18F-fluoride ion • PET • metabolic imaging
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. C. Kaste, G. L. Waszilycsak, M. B. McCarville, and N. C. Daw Estimation of Potential Excess Cancer Incidence in Pediatric 201Tl Imaging Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2010; 194(1): 245 - 249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. J. Cheon, M. S. Kim, J. A. Lee, S.-Y. Lee, W. H. Cho, W. S. Song, J.-S. Koh, J. Y. Yoo, D. H. Oh, D. S. Shin, et al. Prediction Model of Chemotherapy Response in Osteosarcoma by 18F-FDG PET and MRI J. Nucl. Med., September 1, 2009; 50(9): 1435 - 1440. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. Bestic, J. J. Peterson, and L. W. Bancroft Use of FDG PET in Staging, Restaging, and Assessment of Therapy Response in Ewing Sarcoma RadioGraphics, September 1, 2009; 29(5): 1487 - 1500. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. M. Schuetze, L. H. Baker, R. S. Benjamin, and R. Canetta Selection of Response Criteria for Clinical Trials of Sarcoma Treatment Oncologist, April 1, 2008; 13(suppl_2): 32 - 40. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. S. Boss, R. V. Olmos, M. Sinaasappel, J. H. Beijnen, and J. H. M. Schellens Application of PET/CT in the Development of Novel Anticancer Drugs Oncologist, January 1, 2008; 13(1): 25 - 38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Yun, J. S. Lim, S. H. Noh, W. J. Hyung, J. H. Cheong, J. K. Bong, A. Cho, and J. D. Lee Lymph Node Staging of Gastric Cancer Using 18F-FDG PET: A Comparison Study with CT J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2005; 46(10): 1582 - 1588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. A. Weber Use of PET for Monitoring Cancer Therapy and for Predicting Outcome J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2005; 46(6): 983 - 995. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. S. Chew and M. L. Richardson Radiological Reasoning: A Benign-Appearing Bone Mass Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2005; 184(6_supp): S169 - S174. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. B. McCarville, R. Christie, N. C. Daw, S. L. Spunt, and S. C. Kaste PET/CT in the Evaluation of Childhood Sarcomas Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2005; 184(4): 1293 - 1304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. E. Reiman, W. Brenner, J. F. Eary, and K. H. Bohuslavizki PET Tracers for Osteosarcoma J. Nucl. Med., August 1, 2004; 45(8): 1424 - 1425. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | RSS | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY | THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE |
