PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - David C.P. Cobben
AU  - Philip H. Elsinga
AU  - Harald J. Hoekstra
AU  - Albert J.H. Suurmeijer
AU  - Willem Vaalburg
AU  - Bram Maas
AU  - Pieter L. Jager
AU  - Harry M.J. Groen
TI  - Is <sup>18</sup>F-3′-Fluoro-3′-Deoxy-<span class="sc">l</span>-Thymidine Useful for the Staging and Restaging of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer?
DP  - 2004 Oct 01
TA  - Journal of Nuclear Medicine
PG  - 1677--1682
VI  - 45
IP  - 10
4099  - http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/45/10/1677.short
4100  - http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/45/10/1677.full
SO  - J Nucl Med2004 Oct 01; 45
AB  - The objective of this study was to compare 18F-3′-fluoro-3′-deoxy-l-thymidine (FLT) PET with clinical TNM staging, including that by 18F-FDG PET, in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Patients with NSCLC underwent whole-body 18F-FDG PET and whole-body 18F-FLT PET, using a median of 360 MBq of 18F-FDG (range, 160–500 MBq) and a median of 210 MBq of 18F-FLT (range, 130–420 MBq). 18F-FDG PET was performed 90 min after 18F-FDG injection, and 18F-FLT PET was performed 60 min after 18F-FLT injection. Two viewers independently categorized the localization and intensity of tracer uptake for all lesions. All 18F-FDG PET and 18F-FLT PET lesions were compared. Staging with 18F-FLT PET was compared with clinical TNM staging based on the findings of history, physical examination, bronchoscopy, CT, and 18F-FDG PET. From 8 patients, standardized uptake values (SUVs) were calculated. Maximal SUV and mean SUV were calculated. Results: Sixteen patients with stage IB–IV NSCLC and 1 patient with strong suspicion of NSCLC were investigated. Sensitivity on a lesion-by-lesion basis was 80% for the 8 patients who received treatment before 18F-FLT PET and 27% for the 9 patients who did not receive pretreatment, using 18F-FDG PET as the reference standard. Compared with clinical TNM staging, staging by 18F-FLT PET was correct for 8 of 17 patients: 5 of 9 patients in the group with previous therapy and 3 of 8 patients in the group without previous therapy. The maximal SUV of 18F-FLT PET, at a median of 2.7 and range of 0.8–4.5, was significantly lower than that of 18F-FDG PET, which had a median of 8.0 and range of 3.7–18.8 (n = 8; P = 0.012). The mean SUV of 18F-FLT PET, at a median of 2.7 and range of 1.4–3.3, was significantly lower than that of 18F-FDG PET, which had a median of 6.2 and range of 2.8–13.9 (n = 6; P = 0.027). Conclusion: 18F-FLT PET is not useful for staging and restaging NSCLC.