RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 Functional Images Reflect Aggressiveness of Endometrial Carcinoma: Estrogen Receptor Expression Combined with 18F-FDG PET JF Journal of Nuclear Medicine JO J Nucl Med FD Society of Nuclear Medicine SP 1598 OP 1604 DO 10.2967/jnumed.108.060145 VO 50 IS 10 A1 Tetsuya Tsujikawa A1 Yoshio Yoshida A1 Takashi Kudo A1 Yasushi Kiyono A1 Tetsuji Kurokawa A1 Masato Kobayashi A1 Tatsuro Tsuchida A1 Yasuhisa Fujibayashi A1 Fumikazu Kotsuji A1 Hidehiko Okazawa YR 2009 UL http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/50/10/1598.abstract AB The grade of histologic differentiation is one of the most important prognostic factors in patients with endometrial carcinoma and postoperative staging. The aim of this study was to investigate whether 16α-18F-fluoro-17β-estradiol (18F-FES) and 18F-FDG PET reflect clinicopathologic features in patients with endometrial tumors. Methods: A total of 22 patients with endometrial adenocarcinoma and 9 with endometrial hyperplasia (mean age, 56.0 ± 15.3 y) underwent 18F-FES PET for estrogen receptor imaging and 18F-FDG PET. Regional values of tracer uptake were evaluated using standardized uptake value (SUV) and the SUV ratio of 18F-FDG to 18F-FES. The accuracy for predicting tumor aggressiveness defined as high-risk carcinoma (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics [FIGO] stage ≥ Ic or histologic grade ≥ 2), low-risk carcinoma (FIGO stage ≤ Ib and grade 1), and hyperplasia was compared for each PET parameter using receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) analysis. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI findings for clinical staging was also compared. Results: Although the SUV for 18F-FDG was significantly lower in endometrial hyperplasia than in carcinoma, a significant difference between high-risk and low-risk carcinoma was observed only in SUV for 18F-FES. High-risk carcinoma showed a significantly greater 18F-FDG–to–18F-FES ratio (3.6 ± 2.1) than did low-risk carcinoma (1.3 ± 0.5, P < 0.01) and hyperplasia (0.3 ± 0.1, P < 0.005). Low-risk carcinoma showed a significantly higher 18F-FDG–to–18F-FES ratio than hyperplasia (P < 0.0001). In ROC analysis, the most accurate diagnostic PET parameter for predicting high-risk and low-risk carcinoma was the 18F-FDG–to–18F-FES ratio. The optimal 18F-FDG/18F-FES cutoff value of 2.0, determined by ROC analysis, revealed 73% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and 86% accuracy, which was better than the 77% accuracy for MRI. The 18F-FDG–to–18F-FES ratio of 0.5 yielded a correct diagnosis for carcinoma from hyperplasia with 100% accuracy. Conclusion: Endometrial carcinoma reduces estrogen dependency with accelerated glucose metabolism as it progresses to a higher stage or grade. 18F-FES and 18F-FDG PET studies provide a new index of the 18F-FDG–to–18F-FES ratio, which is considered the most informative index reflecting tumor aggressiveness. This index will be useful for making noninvasive diagnoses and deciding the appropriate therapeutic strategy for patients with endometrial carcinoma.