Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
OtherClinical Investigations

Improved Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET Using a Simple Visual Analysis of Tumor Characteristics in Patients with Cervical Cancer

Tom R. Miller, Edward Pinkus, Farrokh Dehdashti and Perry W. Grigsby
Journal of Nuclear Medicine February 2003, 44 (2) 192-197;
Tom R. Miller
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Edward Pinkus
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Farrokh Dehdashti
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Perry W. Grigsby
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • FIGURE 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 1.

    On left is coronal image of patient with small, spherical, and homogeneous primary tumor and no lymph node disease (score = 0), who was alive without disease at 703 d. On right is coronal image of patient with large, nonspherical, and markedly heterogeneous primary tumor (score = 2 + 1 + 2 + 2, or 7), who was dead of her disease at 149 d. Patient on right also had paraaortic lymph node disease (not shown).

  • FIGURE 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 2.

    (A) PFS for scoring of observer 1. (B) OS for observer 1. Good Prognosis = patients with total score < 4; Bad Prognosis = patients with score ≥ 4.

  • FIGURE 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 3.

    (A) PFS superimposed for the 3 observers. (B) OS for the 3 observers. Good Prognosis = patients with total score < 4; Bad Prognosis = patients with score ≥ 4.

  • FIGURE 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 4.

    (A) PFS when only lymph node status was considered. (B) OS when only lymph node status was considered. LN negative = no lymph node disease; LN positive = disease at any site.

  • FIGURE 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIGURE 5.

    (A) PFS for scoring of observer 1 when only visual characteristics of tumor were considered. (B) OS for visual characteristic scoring of observer 1. Good Prognosis = patients with total score < 3; Bad Prognosis = patients with score ≥ 3.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    TABLE 1

    Scoring System

    SizeShapeHeterogeneityLymph nodes*
    0 = small (<4 cm)0 = spherical0 = none0 = none
    1 = moderate (4–10 cm)1 = nonspherical1 = moderate (10%–30%)1 = pelvic
    2 = large (>10 cm)—2 = marked (>30%)2 = paraaortic
    ———3 = distant
    • ↵* Highest value is used as score.

    • View popup
    TABLE 2

    Patient Characteristics

    Patient no.StageHistologyAge (y)StatusPFS (d)OS (d)
    1IIbSquamous43AWD622832
    2IIIbSquamous45DOD96322
    3IIbSquamous61DOD151342
    4IIbAdenosq44DOD95466
    5IIbSquamous27DOD211275
    6Ib2Adenosq56DOD337397
    7IIIbSquamous52DOD103384
    8Ib2Squamous24DOD188270
    9IVbSquamous38DOD132149
    10IIIbSquamous40DOD80138
    11IIbSquamous67DOD196252
    12IIIbSquamous47DOD5555
    13IIbSquamous43DOD160177
    14IIbSquamous52DOD213239
    15Ib2Squamous45DOD265730
    16IIIbSquamous34DOD99334
    17IIIbSquamous48DOD345429
    18IIbSquamous47NED1,0171,017
    19Ib2Squamous28NED498498
    20IIbSquamous28NED615615
    21IIIbSquamous31NED616616
    22IIIbSquamous47NED1,1311,131
    23IIbSquamous54NED894894
    24IIIbAdenosq49NED704704
    25IIbSquamous58NED732732
    26IIIbSquamous27NED752752
    27Ib1Squamous47NED961961
    28IIbSquamous55NED703703
    29Ia1Adeno53NED968968
    30IIbSquamous47NED643643
    31IIbAdeno45NED8831,040
    32IIbSquamous83NED661661
    33IIbSquamous42NED571571
    34Ib2Squamous47NED703703
    35IIbSquamous48NED1,0151,015
    36IIIbSquamous71NED596596
    37Ib2Squamous29NED799799
    38IIbSquamous43NED826826
    39IIIbSquamous44NED761761
    40IIbSquamous56NED830830
    41IIbSquamous57NED730730
    42IIbSquamous54NED614614
    43Ib2Squamous60NED902902
    44IIbSquamous87NED154154
    45IIbSquamous63NED622622
    46Ib1Squamous71NED788788
    47Ib2Squamous36NED382382
    • AWD = alive with disease; DOD = dead of disease; Adenosq = adenosquamous; NED = no evidence of disease; Adeno = adenocarcinoma.

    • View popup
    TABLE 3

    Likelihood Ratios as Function of Cutoff Value for Observer 1

    CutoffPFSOS
    34.89.0
    45.39.5
    53.95.4
    63.64.0
    • View popup
    TABLE 4

    Comparison of Numbers of Patients Scored as Having Bad Prognosis and Good Prognosis by the 3 Pairs of Observers

    Observer pairBad prognosisGood prognosis
    2/1
     Bad prognosis201
     Good prognosis125
    3/1
     Bad prognosis174
     Good prognosis026
    3/2
     Bad prognosis174
     Good prognosis026
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 44, Issue 2
February 1, 2003
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Improved Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET Using a Simple Visual Analysis of Tumor Characteristics in Patients with Cervical Cancer
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Improved Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET Using a Simple Visual Analysis of Tumor Characteristics in Patients with Cervical Cancer
Tom R. Miller, Edward Pinkus, Farrokh Dehdashti, Perry W. Grigsby
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Feb 2003, 44 (2) 192-197;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Improved Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET Using a Simple Visual Analysis of Tumor Characteristics in Patients with Cervical Cancer
Tom R. Miller, Edward Pinkus, Farrokh Dehdashti, Perry W. Grigsby
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Feb 2003, 44 (2) 192-197;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Comprehensive analysis of lung cancer pathology images to discover tumor shape features that predict survival outcome
  • 18F-FDG PET Uptake Characterization Through Texture Analysis: Investigating the Complementary Nature of Heterogeneity and Functional Tumor Volume in a Multi-Cancer Site Patient Cohort
  • Relationship Between 18F-FDG Accumulation and Lactate Dehydrogenase A Expression in Lung Adenocarcinomas
  • Visual Versus Quantitative Assessment of Intratumor 18F-FDG PET Uptake Heterogeneity: Prognostic Value in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
  • Intratumoral Metabolic Heterogeneity of Cervical Cancer
  • Selection of Response Criteria for Clinical Trials of Sarcoma Treatment
  • PET in Cervical Cancer -- Implications for `Staging,' Treatment Planning, Assessment of Prognosis, and Prediction of Response
  • Tumor 18F-FDG Incorporation Is Enhanced by Attenuation of P53 Function in Breast Cancer Cells In Vitro
  • Expanding Role of Positron Emission Tomography in Cancer of the Uterine Cervix
  • Microvessel Density: Correlation with 18F-FDG Uptake and Prognostic Impact in Lung Adenocarcinomas
  • In Vitro Proton Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopic Lactate and Choline Measurements, 18F-FDG Uptake, and Prognosis in Patients with Lung Adenocarcinoma
  • Quantification of 18F-FDG Uptake in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Feasible Prognostic Marker?
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Feasibility of Ultra-Low-Activity 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging Using a Long–Axial-Field-of-View PET/CT System
  • Cardiac Presynaptic Sympathetic Nervous Function Evaluated by Cardiac PET in Patients with Chronotropic Incompetence Without Heart Failure
  • Validation and Evaluation of a Vendor-Provided Head Motion Correction Algorithm on the uMI Panorama PET/CT System
Show more Clinical Investigations

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire