| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Clinical Investigations |
1 Department of Nuclear Medicine and Radiation Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
2 Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
3 Metabolic and Functional Imaging Center, Clinical Research Center, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
Detection of relapse after completion of therapy in patients with Hodgkin’s disease (HD) and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (NHL) constitutes an important challenge in modern medical imaging. An accurate assessment of the presence of residual disease is essential to determine which patients would benefit from additional therapy. The objective of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET in detecting residual disease or relapse during the posttherapy period in patients with HD in comparison with CT. We also established different predictive values for 18F-FDG PET according to the time interval between the end of therapy and the PET study. Methods: Forty-eight patients with HD underwent 18F-FDG PET after the completion of chemotherapy (median, 58 d) between March 1999 and April 2002. Disease-free intervals and proportions were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Standardized uptake values of the most active lesion in each patient with a positive study were also measured. PET and CT results were compared with clinical follow-up, with relapse being defined by a positive biopsy or the introduction of a second-line treatment. Results: Thirty-four patients were still disease-free during a mean follow-up of 605 d. Fourteen patients relapsed during a mean follow-up of 197 d. The sensitivity and specificity of 18F-FDG PET to predict relapse were 79% and 97%, respectively. The positive predictive value and the negative predictive value were both equal to 92%. The diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET (92%) was significantly higher than the accuracy of CT (56%) (P < 0.0005). Patients with positive 18F-FDG PET also had a far shorter median disease-free interval (79 d) than those with positive CT (disease-free proportion of 52% at 1,143 d) (P = 0.0046). The 3 cases of false-negative 18F-FDG PET studies that we observed occurred in patients who underwent their PET study within the first 49 d after the end of chemotherapy. Conclusion: Positive 18F-FDG PET after the end of therapy in HD patients is a strong predictor of relapse. A negative PET study is also an excellent predictor of good prognosis. The diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET to assess the presence of residual disease after therapy is superior to that of CT.
Key Words: Hodgkin’s disease • 18F-FDG PET • lymphoma
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  D.J. Sher, P.M. Mauch, A. Van Den Abbeele, A.S. LaCasce, J. Czerminski, and A.K. Ng Prognostic significance of mid- and post-ABVD PET imaging in Hodgkin's lymphoma: the importance of involved-field radiotherapy Ann. Onc., June 18, 2009; (2009) mdp071v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Hutchings and S. F. Barrington PET/CT for Therapy Response Assessment in Lymphoma J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2009; 50(Suppl_1): 21S - 30S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Terasawa, T. Nihashi, T. Hotta, and H. Nagai 18F-FDG PET for Posttherapy Assessment of Hodgkin's Disease and Aggressive Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Systematic Review J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2008; 49(1): 13 - 21. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Lin, E. Itti, C. Haioun, Y. Petegnief, A. Luciani, J. Dupuis, G. Paone, J.-N. Talbot, A. Rahmouni, and M. Meignan Early 18F-FDG PET for Prediction of Prognosis in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: SUV-Based Assessment Versus Visual Analysis J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2007; 48(10): 1626 - 1632. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. Advani, L. Maeda, P. Lavori, A. Quon, R. Hoppe, S. Breslin, S. A. Rosenberg, and S. J. Horning Impact of Positive Positron Emission Tomography on Prediction of Freedom From Progression After Stanford V Chemotherapy in Hodgkin's Disease J. Clin. Oncol., September 1, 2007; 25(25): 3902 - 3907. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. J. Dann, R. Bar-Shalom, A. Tamir, N. Haim, M. Ben-Shachar, I. Avivi, T. Zuckerman, M. Kirschbaum, O. Goor, D. Libster, et al. Risk-adapted BEACOPP regimen can reduce the cumulative dose of chemotherapy for standard and high-risk Hodgkin lymphoma with no impairment of outcome Blood, February 1, 2007; 109(3): 905 - 909. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Reinhardt, C. Herkel, C. Altehoefer, J. Finke, and E. Moser Computed tomography and 18F-FDG positron emission tomography for therapy control of Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients: when do we really need FDG-PET? Ann. Onc., September 1, 2005; 16(9): 1524 - 1529. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. P. Beal, H. W. Yeung, and J. Yahalom FDG-PET scanning for detection and staging of extranodal marginal zone lymphomas of the MALT type: a report of 42 cases Ann. Onc., March 1, 2005; 16(3): 473 - 480. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Kumar, Y. Xiu, S. Potenta, A. Mavi, H. Zhuang, J. Q. Yu, T. Dhurairaj, S. Dadparvar, and A. Alavi 18F-FDG PET for Evaluation of the Treatment Response in Patients with Gastrointestinal Tract Lymphomas J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2004; 45(11): 1796 - 1803. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Torabi, S. L. Aquino, and M. G. Harisinghani Current Concepts in Lymph Node Imaging J. Nucl. Med., September 1, 2004; 45(9): 1509 - 1518. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. M. Meyer, R. F. Ambinder, and S. Stroobants Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Evolving Concepts with Implications for Practice Hematology, January 1, 2004; 2004(1): 184 - 202. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY | THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE |
