HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: jnumed.108.057190v1 50/Suppl_1/21S    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hutchings, M. Articles by Barrington, S. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hutchings, M. Articles by Barrington, S. F.

PET/CT for Therapy Response Assessment in Lymphoma

¹ Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; ² Department of Haematology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; ³ PET Imaging Centre, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom; and ⁴ Division of Imaging, Guy's and St. Thomas' Foundation NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: Martin Hutchings, Departments of Oncology and Haematology, The Finsen Centre, Copenhagen University Hospital 9, Blegdamsvej DK-2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. E-mail: hutchings{at}dadlnet.dk

PET with ¹⁸F-FDG is a standard staging procedure for most lymphoma subtypes. Performed during and after therapy for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), ¹⁸F-FDG PET results have a high prognostic value and correlate with survival. ¹⁸F-FDG PET has been incorporated into revised response criteria for aggressive lymphomas, and several ongoing trials are under way to investigate the value of treatment adaptation based on early ¹⁸F-FDG PET results for HL and aggressive NHL. There is little evidence to support the use of ¹⁸F-FDG PET for monitoring of the treatment of indolent lymphomas and for routine use in the surveillance setting. So that trial results can be compared and translated easily into clinical practice, uniform and evidence-based guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of response monitoring scans are warranted. Because it is still not proven that the use of interim ¹⁸F-FDG PET can improve patient outcomes, we recommend examination of the use of ¹⁸F-FDG PET for response monitoring in appropriately designed clinical trials.

Key Words: ¹⁸F-FDG • PET • PET/CT • lymphoma • response monitoring • response-adapted therapy

COPYRIGHT © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				U. Petrausch, P. Samaras, S. R. Haile, P. Veit-Haibach, J. D. Soyka, A. Knuth, T. F. Hany, A. Mischo, C. Renner, and N. G. Schaefer Risk-adapted FDG-PET/CT-based follow-up in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after first-line therapy Ann. Onc., February 5, 2010; (2010) mdq015v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. A. Weber Assessing Tumor Response to Therapy J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2009; 50(Suppl_1): 1S - 10S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]