Skip to main content
Log in

Is 11C-choline the most appropriate tracer for prostate cancer?

  • Controversies—For
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gittes RF. Carcinoma of the prostate. N Engl J Med 1991; 324:236–245.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Moul JW. Prostate specific antigen only progression of prostate cancer. J Urol 2000; 163:1632–1642.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hoh CK, Schiepers C, Seltzer MA, Gambhir SS, Silverman DH, J. Czernin J, Maddahi J, Phelps ME. PET in oncology: will it replace the other modalities? Semin Nucl Med 1997; 27:94–106.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rosenthal DI. Radiologic diagnosis of bone metastases. Cancer 1997; 80 (Suppl):1595–1607.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hricak H, Schoder H, Pucar D, Lis E, Eberhardt SC, Onyebuchi CN, Scher HI. Advances in imaging in the postoperative patient with a rising prostate-specific antigen level. Semin Oncol 2003; 30:616–634.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Silverman JM, Krebs TL. MR imaging evaluation with a transrectal surface coil of local recurrence of prostatic cancer in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997; 168:379–385.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hara T, Kosaka TL, Shinoura N, Kondo T. PET imaging of brain tumor with [methyl-11C]choline. J Nucl Med 1997; 38:842–847.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Roivainen A, Forsback S, Gronroos T, Lehikoinen P, Kahkonen M, Sutinen E, Minn H. Blood metabolism of [methyl-11C]choline; implications for in vivo imaging with positron emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med 2000; 27:25–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hara T.11C-choline and 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose in tumor imaging with positron emission tomography. Mol Imaging Biol 2002; 4:267–273.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kotzerke J, Prang J, Neumaier B, Volkmer B, Guhlmann A, Kleinschmidt K, Hautmann R, Reske SN. Experience with carbon-11 choline positron emission tomography in prostate carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med 2000; 27:1415–1419.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hara T, Kosaka N, Kishi H. PET imaging of prostate cancer using carbon-11-choline. J Nucl Med 1998; 39:990–995.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sutinen E, Nurmi M, Roivainen A, Varpula M, Tolvanen T, Lehikoinen P, Minn H. Kinetics of [11C]choline uptake in prostate cancer: a PET study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 31:317–324.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. de Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Vaalburg H, Mensink HJ. Visualization of prostate cancer with11C-choline positron emission tomography. Eur Urol 2002; 42:18–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. de Jong IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Vaalburg W, Mensink HJ. Preoperative staging of pelvic lymph nodes in prostate cancer by11C-choline PET. J Nucl Med 2003; 44:331–335.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. de Jong, IJ, Pruim J, Elsinga PH, Vaalburg W, Mensink HJ.11C-choline positron emission tomography for the evaluation after treatment of localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol 2003; 44:32–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Picchio M., Messa C, Landoni C, Gianolli L, Sironi S, Brioschi M, Matarrese M, Matei DV, De Cobelli F, Del Maschio A, Rocco F, Rigatti P, Fazio F. Value of [11C]choline-positron emission tomography for re-staging prostate cancer: a comparison with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. J Urol 2003; 169:1337–1340.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hara T, Kosaka N, Kishi H. PET imaging of prostate cancer using carbon-11-choline. J Nucl Med 1998; 39:990–995.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Picchio M, Landoni C, Messa C, Gianolli L, Matarrese M, De Cobelli F, Maschio A, Fazio F. Positive [11C]choline and negative [18F]FDG with positron emission tomography in recurrence of prostate cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002; 179:482–484.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ak I, Stokkel MP, Pauwels EK. Positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose in oncology. Part II. The clinical value in detecting and staging primary tumours. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2000; 126: 560–574.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hofer C, Laubenbacher C, Block T, Breul J, Hartung R, Schwaiger M. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography is useless for the detection of local recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 1999; 36:31–35.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Thomas CT, Bradshaw PT, Pollock BH, Montie JE, Taylor JM, Thames HD, McLaughlin PW, DeBiose DA, Hussey DH, Wahl RL. Indium-111-capromab pendetide radioimmunoscintigraphy and prognosis for durable biochemical response to salvage radiation therapy in men after failed prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2003; 21:1715–1721.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fricke E, Machtens S, Hofmann M, van den Hoff J, Bergh S, Brunkhorst T, Meyer GJ, Karstens JH, Knapp WH, Boerner AR. Positron emission tomography with11C-acetate and 18F-FDG in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30:607–611.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Oyama N, Miller TR, Dehdashti F, Siegel BA, Fischer KC, Michalski JM, Kibel AS, Andriole GL, Picus J. Welch, M.11C-acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer: detection of recurrent disease at PSA relapse. J Nucl Med 2003; 44:556–558.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kato T, Tsukamoto E, Kuge Y, Takei T, Shiga T, Shinohara N, Katoh C, Nakada K, Tamaki N. Accumulation of [11C]acetate in normal prostate and benign prostatic hyperplasia: comparison with prostate cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29:1492–1495.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Oyama N, Akino H, Kanamaru H, Suzuki Y, Muramoto S, Yonekura Y, Sadato N, Yamamoto K, Okada K.11C-acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2002; 43:181–186.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kotzerke J, Volkmer BG, Glatting G, van den Hoff J, Gschwend JE, Messer P, Reske SN, Neumaier B. Intraindividual comparison of [11C]acetate and [11C]choline PET for detection of metastases of prostate cancer. Nuklearmedizin 2003; 42:25–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Strauss LG. PET imaging of prostate cancer with11C-acetate. J Nucl Med 2003; 44:549–555.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Wawroschek F, Wengenmair H, Senekowitsch-Schmidtke R, Hamm M, Henke J, Schonberger T, Hauser A, Erhardt W, Harzmann R. Prostate lymphoscintigraphy and radioguided surgery for sentinel lymph node identification in prostate cancer. Technique and results of the first 350 cases. Urol Int 2003; 70:303–310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Coleman R, DeGrado T, Wang S, Baldwin S, Orr M, Reiman R, Price D. Preliminary evaluation of F-18 fluorocholine (FCH) as a PET tumor imaging agent. Clin Positron Imaging 2000; 3:147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. DeGrado TR, Baldwin SW, Wang S, Orr MD, Liao RP, Friedman HS, Reiman R, Price DT, Coleman RE. Synthesis and evaluation of (18)F-labeled choline analogs as oncologic PET tracers. J Nucl Med 2001; 42:1805–1814.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Pelosi E, Messa C, Sironi S, Picchio M, Landoni C, Bettinardi V, Gianolli L, Del Maschio A, Gilardi MC, Fazio F. Value of integrated PET/CT for lesion localization in cancer patients: a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31:in press. DOI 10.1007/s00259-004-1483-3.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ferruccio Fazio.

Additional information

The opinions expressed within the Controversies section represent the views of the authors only.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fazio, F., Picchio, M. & Messa, C. Is 11C-choline the most appropriate tracer for prostate cancer?. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31, 753–755 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1542-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-004-1542-9

Keywords

Navigation