Top

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Published in:

01-07-2006

Use of FDG-PET to monitor response to chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with lymphomas

Author: N. George Mikhaeel

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Special Issue 1/2006

Abstract

Lymphoma is a heterogeneous group of diseases with many curable subtypes. Primary treatment cures a significant proportion of, but not all, patients. Patients not achieving a complete remission with primary treatment, or those who relapse later, have a second chance of cure with high-dose chemotherapy and haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Response assessment is therefore crucial in the management of lymphomas. FDG-PET has an emerging role in assessing response, both at the end of and during treatment. This article will review the current published evidence and offer some suggestions on future directions from a clinician’s viewpoint.

Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B, Shipp MA, Fisher RI, Connors JM, et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:1244–1253PubMed

Lewis E, Bernardino ME, Salvador PG, Cabanillas FF, Barnes PA, Thomas JL. Post-therapy CT-detected masses in lymphoma patients: is it viable tissue? J Comput Tomogr 1982;6:972–975

Surbone A, Longo DL, DeVita VT Jr, Ihde DC, Duffey PL, Jaffe ES, et al. Residual abdominal masses in aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after combination chemotherapy: significance and management. J Clin Oncol 1988;6:1832–1837PubMed

De Wit M, Bumann D, Beyer W, Herbst K, Clausen M, Hossfeld DK. Whole-body positron emission tomography (PET) for diagnosis of residual mass in patients with lymphoma. Ann Oncol 1997;8(Suppl 1):S57–S60CrossRef

Cremerius U, Fabry U, Neuerberg J, Zinmy M, Osieka R, Buell U. Positron emission tomography with ¹⁸F-FDG to detect residual disease after therapy for malignant lymphoma. Nucl Med Commun 1998;19:1055–1063PubMedCrossRef

Bangerter M, Kotzerke J, Greisshammer M, Elsner K, Reske SN, Bergmann L. Positron emission tomography with 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in the staging and follow-up of lymphoma in the chest. Acta Oncol 1999;38:799–804PubMedCrossRef

Bangerter M, Moog F, Greisshammer M, et al. Role of whole-body FDG-PET imaging in predicting relapse of malignant lymphoma in patients with residual masses after treatment. Radiography 1999;5:155–163CrossRef

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, Najjar F, Paulus P, Rigo P, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose for post-treatment evaluation in Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood 1999;94:429–433PubMed

Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, Hain SF, O’Doherty MJ. 18-FDG-PET for the assessment of residual masses on CT following treatment of lymphomas. Ann Oncol 2000;11(Suppl 1):S147–S150CrossRef

10.

Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, O’Doherty MJ, Hain S, Maisey MN. 18-FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in the treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, comparison with CT. Leuk Lymphoma 2000;39:543–553PubMed

11.

Maisey NR, Hill ME, Webb A, Cunningham D, Flux GD, Padhani A, et al. Are ¹⁸fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging useful in the prediction of relapse in lymphoma residual masses? Eur J Cancer 2000;36:200–206PubMedCrossRef

12.

Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Van Steenweghen SV, Thomas J, Vandenberghe P, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ([¹⁸F]FDG) after first-line chemotherapy in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: is [¹⁸F]FDG-PET a valid alternative to conventional diagnostic methods? J Clin Oncol 2001;19:414–419PubMed

13.

Van den Bossche B, Lambert B, De Winter F, Kolindou A, Dierckx RA, Noens L, et al. 18-FDG PET vs high-dose⁶⁷Ga scintigraphy for restaging and treatment follow-up of lymphoma patients. Nucl Med Commun 2002;23(11):1079–1083CrossRef

14.

Filmont J-E, Vranjesevic D, Quon A, Margolis DJA, Ko F, Safaei A, et al. Conventional imaging and 2-deoxy-2-[¹⁸F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography for predicting the clinical outcome of previously treated non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients. Mol Imaging Biol 2003;5(4):232–239PubMedCrossRef

15.

Lavely WC, Delbeke D, Greer JP, Morgan DS, Byrne DW, Price RR, et al. FDG-PET in the follow-up management of patients with newly diagnosed Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma after first-line chemotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003;57(2):307–315PubMedCrossRef

16.

Kumar R, Xiu Y, Potenta S, Mavi A, Zhuang H, Yu JQ, et al. ¹⁸F-FDG PET for evaluation of the treatment response in patients with gastrointestinal tract lymphomas. J Nucl Med 2004;45:1796–1803PubMed

17.

Zinzani PL, Fanti S, Battista G, Tani M, Castellucci P, Stefoni V, et al. Predicitve role of positron emission tomography (PET) in the outcome of lymphoma patients. Br J Cancer 2004;91:850–854PubMed

18.

Reinhardt MJ, Herkel C, Altehoefer C, Finke J, Moser E. Computed tomography and ¹⁸F-FDG positron emission tomography for therapy control of Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients: when do we really need FDG-PET? Ann Oncol 2005;16:1524–1529PubMedCrossRef

19.

Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, Ritchie JM, Menda Y, Wooldridge JE, et al. Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4652–4661PubMedCrossRef

20.

Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Thomas J, Vandenberghe P, Balzarini J, et al. Can positron emission tomography with (¹⁸F)-fluorodeoxyglucose after first-line treatment distinguish Hodgkin’s disease patients who need additional therapy from others in whom additional therapy would mean avoidable toxicity? Br J Haematol 2001;15:272–278CrossRef

21.

Hueltenschmidt B, Sautter-Bihl ML, Lang O, Bihl H. Whole body positron emission tomography in the treatment of Hodgkin disease. Cancer 2001;91:302–310PubMedCrossRef

22.

Naumann R, Vaic A, Beuthien-Baumann B, Bredow J, Kropp J, Kittner T, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography in the evaluation of post-treatment residual mass in patients with Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Br J Haematol 2001;115:793–800PubMedCrossRef

23.

Weihrauch MR, Re D, Scheidhauer K, Ansen S, Dietlein M, Bischoff S, et al. Thoracic positron emission tomography using ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose for the evaluation of residual mediastinal Hodgkin disease. Blood 2001;98:2930–2934PubMedCrossRef

24.

De Wit M, Bohuslavizki KH, Buchert R, Bumann D, Clausen M, Hossfeld DK. ¹⁸FDG-PET following treatment as valid predictor for disease-free survival in Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2001;12:29–37PubMedCrossRef

25.

Dittman H, Sokler M, Kollmansberger C, Dohmen BM, Baumann C, Kopp A, et al. Comparison of ¹⁸FDG-PET with CT scans in the evaluation of patients with residual and recurrent Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Oncol Rep 2001;8:1393–1399

26.

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, Belhocine T, Hustinx R, Rigo P, et al. Early detection of relapse by whole-body positron emission tomography in the follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s disease. Ann Oncol 2003;14:123–130PubMedCrossRef

27.

Guay C, Lepine M, Verreault J, Benard F. Prognostic value of PET using ¹⁸F-FDG in Hodgkin’s disease for posttreatment evaluation. J Nucl Med 2003;44:1225–1231PubMed

28.

Panizo C, Perez-Salazar M, Bendandi M, Rodriguez-Calvillo M, Boan JF, Garcia-Celloso MJ, et al. Positron emission tomography using ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose for the evaluation of residual Hodgkin’s disease mediastinal masses. Leuk Lymph 2004;45(9):1829–1833CrossRef

29.

Filmont J-E, Yap CS, Ko F, Vranjesevic D, Quon A, Margolis DJA, et al. Conventional imaging and 2-deoxy-2-[¹⁸F]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography for predicting the clinical outcome of patients with previously treated Hodgkin’s disease. Mol Imaging Biol 2004;6(1):47–54PubMedCrossRef

30.

Zinzani PL, Chierichetti F, Zompatori M, Tani M, Stefoni V, Garraffa G, et al. Advantages of positron emission tomography (PET) with respect to computed tomography in the follow-up of lymphoma patients with abdominal presentation. Leuk Lymphoma 2002;43(6):1239–1243PubMed

31.

Jerusalem G, Hustinx R, Beguin Y, Fillet G. Evaluation of therapy for lymphoma. Semin Nucl Med 2005;35:186–196PubMedCrossRef

32.

Coiffier B, Lepage E, Briere J, Herbrecht R, Tilly H, Boubdallah R, et al. CHOP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CHOP alone in elderly patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med 2002;346:235–242PubMedCrossRef

33.

Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte M-F, Najjar F, Paulus P, Rigo P, et al. Persistent tumour ¹⁸F-FDG uptake after a few cycles of polychemotherapy is predictive of treatment failure in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Haematologica 2000;85:613–618PubMed

34.

Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Vandenberghe P, Thomas J, de Groot T, et al. Early re-staging positron emission tomography with ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2002;13:1356–1363PubMedCrossRef

35.

Ziljstra JM, Hoekstra OS, Raijhmakers PGHM, Comans EFI, van der Hoeven JJM, Teule GJJ, et al. ¹⁸FDG positron emission tomography versus ⁶⁷Ga scintigraphy as prognostic test during chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Br J Haematol 2003;123:454–462CrossRef

36.

Friedberg JW, Fischman A, Neuberg D, Kim H, Takvorian T, Ng AK, et al. FDG-PET is superior to gallium scintigraphy in staging and more sensitive in the follow-up of patients with de novo Hodgkin lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma 2004;45:85–92PubMedCrossRef

37.

Torizuka T, Nakamura F, Kanno T, Futatsubashi M, Yoshikawa E, Okada H, et al. Early therapy monitoring with FDG-PET in aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and Hodgkin’s lymphoma.Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:22–28PubMedCrossRef

38.

Haioun C, Itti E, Rahmouni A, Brice P, Rain J-D, Belhadj K, et al. [¹⁸F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in aggressive lymphoma: an early prognostic tool for predicting patient outcome. Blood 2005;106:1376–1381PubMedCrossRef

39.

Mikhaeel NG, Hutchings M, Fields P, O’Doherty MJO, Timothy AR. FDG-PET after two to three cycles of chemotherapy predicts progression-free and overall survival in high-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2005;16:1514–1523PubMedCrossRef

40.

Hutchings M, Mikhaeel NG, Fields PA, Nunan T, Timothy AR. Prognostic value of interim FDG-PET after two or three cycles of chemotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2005;16:1160–1168PubMedCrossRef

41.

Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, Pederson LM, Buhl T, Jurlander J, et al. FDG-PET after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts treatment failure and progression-free survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood 2006;107:52–59PubMedCrossRef

42.

http://www.ncrn.org.uk/portfolio/dbase.asp?GroupID=9

43.

Romer W, Hanauske A, Ziegler S, Thodtmann R, Weber W, Fuchs C, et al. Positron emission tomography in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: assessment of chemotherapy with fluorodeoxyglucose. Blood 1998;91:4464–4471PubMed

44.

Kostakoglu L, Coleman M, Leonard J, Kuji I, Zoe H. PET predicts prognosis after 1 cycle of chemotherapy in aggressive lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease. J Nucl Med 2002;43:1018–1027PubMed

45.

Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Vandenberghe P, Maertens J, Bormans G, et al. Prognostic value of pretransplantation positron emission tomography using fluorine 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with aggressive lymphoma treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation. Blood 2003;102:53–59PubMedCrossRef

46.

Cremerius U, Fabry U, Wildberger JE, Zimny M, Reinartz P, Nowak B, et al. Pre-transplant positron emission tomography (PET) using fluorine-18-fluoro-deoxyglucose (FDG) predicts outcome in patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 2002;30:103–111PubMedCrossRef

47.

Becherer A, Mitterbauer M, Jaeger U, Kalhs P, Greinix HT, Karanikas G, et al. Positron emission tomography with(¹⁸F)2-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) predicts relapse of malignant lymphoma after high-dose therapy with stem cell transplantation. Leukaemia 2002;16:260–267CrossRef

48.

Hart DP, Avivi I, Thomson KJ, Peggs KS, Morris EC, Goldstone AH, et al. Use of ¹⁸F-FDG positron emission tomography following allogeneic transplantation to guide adoptive immunotherapy with donor lymphocyte infusions. Br J Haematol 2005;128:824–829PubMedCrossRef

Title: Use of FDG-PET to monitor response to chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with lymphomas
Author: N. George Mikhaeel
Publication date: 01-07-2006
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue Special Issue 1/2006
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-006-0132-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Use of FDG-PET to monitor response to chemotherapy and radiotherapy in patients with lymphomas

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Special Issue 1/2006

Monitoring chemotherapy and radiotherapy of solid tumors

Current standards for response evaluation by imaging techniques

How should we analyse FDG PET studies for monitoring tumour response?

Imaging biomarkers as surrogate endpoints for drug development

Is 3′-deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine a better marker for tumour response than 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose?

Hypoxia imaging-directed radiation treatment planning