Published Clinical Applications of 18F-DOPA PET in Malignant Tumors
| Authors | Year | Reference | Tumor type | No. of patients | Basis for sensitivity determination | Sensitivity (%) | No. of lesions, regions, or patients | Specificity (%) | Reference standard | Other findings including sensitivities |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hoegerle et al. | 1999 | 43 | Carcinoid | 1 | Patients | 100 | 1 | First patient in literature | ||
| Hoegerle et al. | 2001 | 44 | Carcinoid/prospective | 17/17 | All lesions | 65 | 92 | Comp (H, I, FU) | SRS 57%, 18F-FDG PET 29%, CT/MRI 73% | |
| Primary tumors | 88 | SRS 50%, CT 25% | ||||||||
| Lymph nodes | 87 | SRS 57%, CT 62% | ||||||||
| Organ metastases | 65 | SRS 57%, CT 97%; PET was best for primary tumors and lymph nodes | ||||||||
| Becherer et al. | 2004 | 45 | Mixed/all prospective | 18/23 | All regions | 83 | 54 | 96 | CT | SRS 58% [overall] |
| Region: bone | 100 | 12 | 30-min postinjection interval was similar to 90-min interval | |||||||
| Region: lung | 20 | 5 | ||||||||
| Region: mediastinum | 100 | 7 | ||||||||
| Region: liver | 82 | 16 | ||||||||
| Region: pancreas | 67 | 3 | ||||||||
| Region: lymph nodes | 91 | 11 | ||||||||
| Koopmans et al. | 2006 | 35 | Carcinoid/prospective | 53/53 | All patients | 100 | 53 | Comp (H, I, FU) | SRS 92%, CT 87% | |
| All regions | 95 | 122 | 100 | SRS 66%, CT 57% | ||||||
| All lesions | 96 | 687 | ||||||||
| Lesions: mediastinum | 95 | 39 | ||||||||
| Lesions: lung | 55 | 11 | ||||||||
| Lesions: liver | 97 | 360 | ||||||||
| Lesions: pancreas | 100 | 3 | ||||||||
| Lesions: abdomen | 96 | 208 | ||||||||
| Lesions: bone | 97 | 61 | ||||||||
| Lesions: extremities | 100 | 5 | ||||||||
| Montravers et al. | 2006 | 46 | Mixed/retrospective | 17/32 | All patients | 63 | 32 | ? | SRS 78% | |
| Carcinoid | 93 | 15 | 75 | Specificity was based on 4 patients; SRS 81% | ||||||
| Noncarcinoid | 25 | 12 | SRS 75% | |||||||
| Ambrosini et al. | 2007 | 47 | Mixed/retrospective | 13/? | Patients with negative SRS results | Not applicable | Impact on management in 11/13 patients | |||
| Hoegerle et al. | 2002 | 48 | Pheochromocytoma | 14 | All patients | 100 | 17 | MRI | MIBG 71% | |
| Hoegerle et al. | 2003 | 49 | Paraganglioma | 10 | Patients | 80 | 10 | MRI | PET correctly detected 3 more tumors | |
| Lesions | 73 | 15 | ||||||||
| Brink et al. | 2006 | 50 | Paraganglioma | 1 | Patient | 1 | PET detected lesions after resection | |||
| Boedeker et al. | 2005 | 51 | Paraganglioma | 10 | Patients | No results presented; positive general statements | ||||
| Hoegerle et al. | 2001 | 52 | Medullary thyroid carcinoma | 11 | All lesions | 63 | 27 | Comp (H, I, FU) | 18F-FDG PET 44%, SRS 52%, CT/MRI 91%; CT/MRI had low specificities for primary tumors 55% and for recurrences 57%, 18F-DOPA PET was better; 18F-DOPA PET was best for lymph node staging | |
| Beuthien- Baumann et al. | 2007 | 53 | Medullary thyroid carcinoma | 15 | Patients | 46 | 15 | H (partially) | 18F-FDG 46%; 18F-DOPA and 18F-FDG were complementary | |
| Jacob et al. | 2003 | 54 | Small cell lung cancer | 4 | Lesions | 37 | 11 | 18F-FDG, CT, bone scan | 18F-FDG yielded higher SUVs and detected more lesions | |
| Dimitrakopoulou- Strauss et al. | 2001 | 55 | Melanoma | 11 | Patients | CT, ultrasound | 18F-FDG 84%; 18F-FDG uptake was 1.5 times higher, although in 4 patients, 18F-DOPA uptake was higher | |||
| Lesions | 64 | 22 | ||||||||
| Seshadri et al. | 2006 | 56 | Melanoma | 1 | Patient | High uptake in 2 adrenal metastases, similar to 18F-FDG uptake | ||||
| Lange et al. | 2006 | 57 | Hyperparathyroidism | 8 | Patients | 0 | 8 | H | No 18F-DOPA uptake | |
| Talbot et al. | 2005 | 58 | Merkel cell carcinoma | 5 | Patients | 2 | 2 | I, FU | 18F-DOPA uptake was lower than 18F-FDG uptake |
Comp = composite reference standard; H = histology; I = imaging; FU = follow-up.