Top

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Published in:

01-06-2017 | Review Article

An update on the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer

Authors: Benjapa Khiewvan, Drew A. Torigian, Sahra Emamzadehfard, Koosha Paydary, Ali Salavati, Sina Houshmand, Thomas J. Werner, Abass Alavi

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 6/2017

Abstract

This review article summarizes the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer. With regard to the diagnosis of ovarian cancer, the presence of FDG uptake within the ovary of a postmenopausal woman raises the concern for ovarian cancer. Multiple studies show that FDG PET/CT can detect lymph node and distant metastasis in ovarian cancer with high accuracy and may, therefore, alter the management to obtain better clinical outcomes. Although PET/CT staging is superior for N and M staging of ovarian cancer, its role is limited for T staging. Additionally, FDG PET/CT is of great benefit in evaluating treatment response and has prognostic value in patients with ovarian cancer. FDG PET/CT also has value to detect recurrent disease, particularly in patients with elevated serum CA-125 levels and negative or inconclusive conventional imaging test results. PET/MRI may beneficial for tumor staging because MRI has higher soft tissue contrast and no ionizing radiation exposure compared to CT. Some non-FDG PET radiotracers such as ¹⁸F-fluorothymidine (FLT) or ¹¹C-methionine (MET) have been studied in preclinical and clinical studies as well and may play a role in the evaluation of patients with ovarian cancer.

Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64:9–29. doi:10.3322/caac.21208.PubMedCrossRef

Mohaghegh P, Rockall AG. Imaging strategy for early ovarian cancer: characterization of adnexal masses with conventional and advanced imaging techniques. Radiographics: Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc. 2012;32:1751–73. doi:10.1148/rg.326125520.CrossRef

Forstner R, Sala E, Kinkel K, Spencer JA. European Society of Urogenital R. ESUR guidelines: ovarian cancer staging and follow-up. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:2773–80. doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1886-4.PubMedCrossRef

Mitchell DG, Javitt MC, Glanc P, Bennett GL, Brown DL, Dubinsky T, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria staging and follow-up of ovarian cancer. J Am Coll Radiol: JACR. 2013;10:822–7. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2013.07.017.PubMedCrossRef

Bandiera E, Romani C, Specchia C, Zanotti L, Galli C, Ruggeri G, et al. Serum human epididymis protein 4 and risk for ovarian malignancy algorithm as new diagnostic and prognostic tools for epithelial ovarian cancer management. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev: Publ Am Assoc Cancer Res Cosponsored Am Soc Prev Oncol. 2011;20:2496–506. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0635.CrossRef

Holcomb K, Vucetic Z, Miller MC, Knapp RC. Human epididymis protein 4 offers superior specificity in the differentiation of benign and malignant adnexal masses in premenopausal women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205:358 e1-6. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2011.05.017.PubMedCrossRef

Outwater EK, Dunton CJ. Imaging of the ovary and adnexa: clinical issues and applications of MR imaging. Radiology. 1995;194:1–18.PubMedCrossRef

Grab D, Flock F, Stöhr I, Nüssle K, Rieber A, Fenchel S, et al. Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Gynecol Oncol. 2000;77:454–9.PubMedCrossRef

Kim SK, Kang KW, Roh JW, Sim JS, Lee ES, Park SY. Incidental ovarian 18F-FDG accumulation on PET: correlation with the menstrual cycle. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:757–63. doi:10.1007/s00259-005-1771-6.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Short S, Hoskin P, Wong W. Ovulation and increased FDG uptake on PET: potential for a false-positive result. Clin Nucl Med. 2005;30:707.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Yun M, Cho A, Lee JH, Choi YJ, Lee JD, Kim CK. Physiologic 18F-FDG uptake in the fallopian tubes at mid cycle on PET/CT. J Nucl Med: Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2010;51:682–5. doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.074484.CrossRef

12.

Nishizawa S, Inubushi M, Ozawa F, Kido A, Okada H. Physiological FDG uptake in the ovaries after hysterectomy. Ann Nucl Med. 2007;21:345–8. doi:10.1007/s12149-007-0029-8.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Shaaban A, Rezvani M. Ovarian cancer: detection and radiologic staging. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;21:247–59.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Shaaban A, Rezvani M. Ovarian cancer: detection and radiologic staging. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2009;52:73–93.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Schorge JO, Modesitt SC, Coleman RL, Cohn DE, Kauff ND, Duska LR, et al. SGO white paper on ovarian cancer: etiology, screening and surveillance. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;119:7–17. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.06.003.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Brown DL, Andreotti RF, Lee SI, Dejesus Allison SO, Bennett GL, Dubinsky T, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria(c) ovarian cancer screening. Ultrasound Q. 2010;26:219–23. doi:10.1097/RUQ.0b013e3181fdd604.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Sohaib SA, Mills TD, Sahdev A, Webb JA, Vantrappen PO, Jacobs IJ, et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound in patients with adnexal masses. Clin Radiol. 2005;60:340–8. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2004.09.007.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Anthoulakis C, Nikoloudis N. Pelvic MRI as the “gold standard” in the subsequent evaluation of ultrasound-indeterminate adnexal lesions: a systematic review. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132:661–8. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.10.022.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Zhang P, Cui Y, Li W, Ren G, Chu C, Wu X. Diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted imaging with conventional MR imaging for differentiating complex solid and cystic ovarian tumors at 1.5T. World J Surg Oncol. 2012;10:237. doi:10.1186/1477-7819-10-237.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

20.

Ko SM, Jung DC, Oh YT, Kim SH, Kang S. Discrepancy between preoperative imaging and surgical findings in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: a study of initial false-negative lesions. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2013;37:568–71. doi:10.1097/RCT.0b013e31828b683b.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Nam EJ, Yun MJ, Oh YT, Kim JW, Kim JH, Kim S, et al. Diagnosis and staging of primary ovarian cancer: correlation between PET/CT, Doppler US, and CT or MRI. Gynecol Oncol. 2010;116:389–94. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.10.059.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Castellucci P, Perrone AM, Picchio M, Ghi T, Farsad M, Nanni C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET/CT in characterizing ovarian lesions and staging ovarian cancer: correlation with transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and histology. Nucl Med Commun. 2007;28:589–95. doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e3281afa256.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Hubner KF, McDonald TW, Niethammer JG, Smith GT, Gould HR, Buonocore E. Assessment of primary and metastatic ovarian cancer by positron emission tomography (PET) using 2-[18 F] deoxyglucose (2-[18 F] FDG). Gynecol Oncol. 1993;51:197–204.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Lapela M, Leskinen-Kallio S, Varpula M, Grénman S, Salmi T, Alanen K, et al. Metabolic imaging of ovarian tumors with carbon-11-methionine: a PET study. J Nucl Med: Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 1995;36:2196–200.

25.

Kitajima K, Suzuki K, Senda M, Kita M, Nakamoto Y, Onishi Y, et al. FDG-PET/CT for diagnosis of primary ovarian cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2011;32:549–53. doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e328345b339.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Tanizaki Y, Kobayashi A, Shiro M, Ota N, Takano R, Mabuchi Y, et al. Diagnostic value of preoperative SUVmax on FDG-PET/CT for the detection of ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer: Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2014;24:454–60. doi:10.1097/IGC.0000000000000074.CrossRef

27.

Yamamoto Y, Oguri H, Yamada R, Maeda N, Kohsaki S, Fukaya T. Preoperative evaluation of pelvic masses with combined 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Int J Gynaecol Obstet: Off Organ Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet. 2008;102:124–7. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.02.019.CrossRef

28.

Karantanis D, Allen-Auerbach M, Czernin J. Relationship among glycolytic phenotype, grade, and histological subtype in ovarian carcinoma. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:49–53. doi:10.1097/RLU.0b013e3182291e03.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Schwarz JK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Delbeke D. The role of 18F-FDG PET in assessing therapy response in cancer of the cervix and ovaries. J Nucl Med: Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2009;50 Suppl 1:64S–73. doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.057257.CrossRef

30.

Benedet JL, Bender H, Jones 3rd H, Ngan HY, Pecorelli S. FIGO staging classifications and clinical practice guidelines in the management of gynecologic cancers. FIGO Committee on Gynecologic Oncology. Int J Gynaecol Obstet: Off Org Int Fed Gynaecol Obstet. 2000;70:209–62.CrossRef

31.

Edge SBBD, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A. Ovary and primary peritoneal carcinoma. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 419–28.

32.

Stevens S, Hricak H, Stern J. Ovarian lesions: detection and characterization with gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging at 1.5 T. Radiology. 1991;181:481–8.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Yamashita Y, Torashima M, Hatanaka Y, Harada M, Higashida Y, Takahashi M, et al. Adnexal masses: accuracy of characterization with transvaginal US and precontrast and postcontrast MR imaging. Radiology. 1995;194:557–65.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Nakamura K, Hongo A, Kodama J, Hiramatsu Y. The pretreatment of maximum standardized uptake values (SUVmax) of the primary tumor is predictor for poor prognosis for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Acta Med Okayama. 2012;66:53–60.PubMed

35.

Signorelli M, Guerra L, Pirovano C, Crivellaro C, Fruscio R, Buda A, et al. Detection of nodal metastases by 18F-FDG PET/CT in apparent early stage ovarian cancer: a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;131:395–9. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.022.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Kitajima K, Murakami K, Yamasaki E, Kaji Y, Fukasawa I, Inaba N, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of integrated FDG-PET/contrast-enhanced CT in staging ovarian cancer: comparison with enhanced CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1912–20. doi:10.1007/s00259-008-0890-2.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Avril N, Gourtsoyianni S, Reznek R. Gynecological cancers. Methods Mol Biol. 2011;727:171–89. doi:10.1007/978-1-61779-062-1_10.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Dauwen H, Van Calster B, Deroose CM, Op de Beeck K, Amant F, Neven P, et al. PET/CT in the staging of patients with a pelvic mass suspicious for ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;131:694–700. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.08.020.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Yuan Y, Gu ZX, Tao XF, Liu SY. Computer tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography or positron emission tomography/computer tomography for detection of metastatic lymph nodes in patients with ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:1002–6. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.01.112.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Michielsen K, Vergote I, Op de Beeck K, Amant F, Leunen K, Moerman P, et al. Whole-body MRI with diffusion-weighted sequence for staging of patients with suspected ovarian cancer: a clinical feasibility study in comparison to CT and FDG-PET/CT. Eur Radiol. 2014;24:889–901. doi:10.1007/s00330-013-3083-8.PubMedCrossRef

41.

De Iaco P, Musto A, Orazi L, Zamagni C, Rosati M, Allegri V, et al. FDG-PET/CT in advanced ovarian cancer staging: value and pitfalls in detecting lesions in different abdominal and pelvic quadrants compared with laparoscopy. Eur J Radiol. 2011;80:e98–103. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.07.013.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Mahmoud HA, Atta H, Diab WA, Eloteify LM, Imam H, Gabr A, et al. The predominant role of 18F-FDG PET/CT over MDCT in assessment of ovarian cancer patients. The Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2015;46:1313–22. doi:10.1016/j.ejrnm.2015.07.011.CrossRef

43.

Martoni AA, Fanti S, Zamagni C, Rosati M, De Iaco P, D’Errico Grigioni A, et al. [18F]FDG-PET/CT monitoring early identifies advanced ovarian cancer patients who will benefit from prolonged neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging: Off Publ Ital Assoc Nucl Med. 2011;55:81–90.

44.

Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, Naehrig J, Rutke S, Weber WA, et al. Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7445–53. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.06.965.CrossRef

45.

Vallius T, Peter A, Auranen A, Carpén O, Kemppainen J, Matomäki J, et al. 18 F-FDG-PET/CT can identify histopathological non-responders to platinum-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2016;140:29–35.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Picchio M, Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, Landoni C, Gianolli L, et al. Advanced ovarian carcinoma: usefulness of [(18)F]FDG-PET in combination with CT for lesion detection after primary treatment. Q J Nucl Med: Off Publ Ital Assoc Nucl Med. 2003;47:77–84.

47.

Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, Zangheri B, Aletti G, Garavaglia E, et al. Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologic findings. Radiology. 2004;233:433–40. doi:10.1148/radiol.2332031800.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Kanenishi K, Ohno M, Hata T, Kushida Y, et al. Monitoring the neoadjuvant therapy response in gynecological cancer patients using FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:287–95. doi:10.1007/s00259-007-0627-7.PubMedCrossRef

49.

Kim S, Chung JK, Kang SB, Kim MH, Jeong JM, Lee DS, et al. [18F]FDG PET as a substitute for second-look laparotomy in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:196–201. doi:10.1007/s00259-003-1367-y.PubMedCrossRef

50.

Rose PG, Faulhaber P, Miraldi F, Abdul-Karim FW. Positive emission tomography for evaluating a complete clinical response in patients with ovarian or peritoneal carcinoma: correlation with second-look laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;82:17–21. doi:10.1006/gyno.2001.6246.PubMedCrossRef

51.

Antunovic L, Cimitan M, Borsatti E, Baresic T, Sorio R, Giorda G, et al. Revisiting the clinical value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in detection of recurrent epithelial ovarian carcinomas: correlation with histology, serum CA-125 assay, and conventional radiological modalities. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37:e184–8. doi:10.1097/RLU.0b013e31825b2583.PubMedCrossRef

52.

Goonewardene TI, Hall MR, Rustin GJ. Management of asymptomatic patients on follow-up for ovarian cancer with rising CA-125 concentrations. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:813–21. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70273-5.PubMedCrossRef

53.

Dragosavac S, Derchain S, Caserta NM. G DES. Staging recurrent ovarian cancer with (18)FDG PET/CT. Oncol Lett. 2013;5:593–7. doi:10.3892/ol.2012.1075.PubMed

54.

Karlan BY, Hawkins R, Hoh C, Lee M, Tse N, Cane P, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography with 2-[18 F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose can detect recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol. 1993;51:175–81.PubMedCrossRef

55.

Zimny M, Siggelkow W, Schröder W, Nowak B, Biemann S, Rath W, et al. 2-[Fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis of recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2001;83:310–5.PubMedCrossRef

56.

Yuan C, Liu R, Wang P, Ng H, Yeh S. Whole-body PET with (fluorine-18)-2-deoxyglucose for detecting recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Initial report. J Reprod Med. 1999;44:775–8.PubMed

57.

Kubik-Huch R, Dörffler W, Von Schulthess G, Marincek B, Köchli O, Seifert B, et al. Value of (18F)-FDG positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2000;10:761–7.PubMedCrossRef

58.

Nanni C, Rubello D, Farsad M, De Iaco P, Sansovini M, Erba P, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of recurrent ovarian cancer: a prospective study on forty-one patients. Eur J Surg Oncol: J Eur Soc Surg Oncol Br Assoc Surg Oncol. 2005;31:792–7. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2005.02.029.CrossRef

59.

Chen YM, Chen T, Zee CS, Shi YP, Wan LR, Tong LJ. Is there an impact of 18F-FDG PET/CT on the surveillance and clinical management of recurrent ovarian cancer? Research based on a large sample in a single PET/CT center. Nucl Med Commun. 2014;35:347–52. doi:10.1097/MNM.0000000000000051.PubMedCrossRef

60.

Sari O, Kaya B, Kara PO, Gedik GK, Celik C, Ozbek O, et al. The role of FDG-PET/CT in ovarian cancer patients with high tumor markers or suspicious lesion on contrast-enhanced CT in evaluation of recurrence and/or in determination of intraabdominal metastases. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol. 2012;31:3–8. doi:10.1016/j.remn.2011.03.008.PubMed

61.

Bristow RE, Giuntoli 2nd RL, Pannu HK, Schulick RD, Fishman EK, Wahl RL. Combined PET/CT for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer limited to retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Gynecol Oncol. 2005;99:294–300. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.06.019.PubMedCrossRef

62.

Limei Z, Yong C, Yan X, Shuai T, Jiangyan X, Zhiqing L. Accuracy of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the diagnosis and restaging for recurrent ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer: Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2013;23:598–607. doi:10.1097/IGC.0b013e31828a183c.CrossRef

63.

Hebel CB, Behrendt FF, Heinzel A, Krohn T, Mottaghy FM, Bauerschlag DO, et al. Negative 18F-2-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT predicts good cancer specific survival in patients with a suspicion of recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83:463–7. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.12.006.PubMedCrossRef

64.

Takeuchi S, Lucchini M, Schmeler KM, Coleman RL, Gershenson DM, Munsell MF, et al. Utility of 18F-FDG PET/CT in follow-up of patients with low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;133:100–4. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.02.008.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

65.

Pan HS, Lee SL, Huang LW, Chen YK. Combined positron emission tomography-computed tomography and tumor markers for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;283:335–41. doi:10.1007/s00404-010-1404-6.PubMedCrossRef

66.

Bhosale P, Peungjesada S, Wei W, Levenback CF, Schmeler K, Rohren E, et al. Clinical utility of positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the evaluation of suspected recurrent ovarian cancer in the setting of normal CA-125 levels. Int J Gynecol Cancer: Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2010;20:936–44. doi:10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181e82a7f.CrossRef

67.

Risum S, Hogdall C, Markova E, Berthelsen AK, Loft A, Jensen F, et al. Influence of 2-(18F) fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography on recurrent ovarian cancer diagnosis and on selection of patients for secondary cytoreductive surgery. Int J Gynecol Cancer: Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2009;19:600–4. doi:10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181a3cc94.CrossRef

68.

Sala E, Kataoka M, Pandit-Taskar N, Ishill N, Mironov S, Moskowitz CS, et al. Recurrent ovarian cancer: use of contrast-enhanced CT and PET/CT to accurately localize tumor recurrence and to predict patients’ survival. Radiology. 2010;257:125–34. doi:10.1148/radiol.10092279.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

69.

Sanli Y, Turkmen C, Bakir B, Iyibozkurt C, Ozel S, Has D, et al. Diagnostic value of PET/CT is similar to that of conventional MRI and even better for detecting small peritoneal implants in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:509–15. doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e32834fc5bf.PubMedCrossRef

70.

Gu P, Pan LL, Wu SQ, Sun L, Huang G. CA 125, PET alone, PET-CT, CT and MRI in diagnosing recurrent ovarian carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol. 2009;71:164–74. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.019.PubMedCrossRef

71.

Fulham MJ, Carter J, Baldey A, Hicks RJ, Ramshaw JE, Gibson M. The impact of PET-CT in suspected recurrent ovarian cancer: a prospective multi-centre study as part of the Australian PET Data Collection Project. Gynecol Oncol. 2009;112:462–8. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.08.027.PubMedCrossRef

72.

Kitajima K, Ueno Y, Suzuki K, Kita M, Ebina Y, Yamada H, et al. Low-dose non-enhanced CT versus full-dose contrast-enhanced CT in integrated PET/CT scans for diagnosing ovarian cancer recurrence. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:3557–62. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.03.020.PubMedCrossRef

73.

Menzel C, Dobert N, Hamscho N, Zaplatnikov K, Vasvatekis S, Matic V, et al. The influence of CA 125 and CEA levels on the results of (18)F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in suspected recurrence of epithelial ovarian cancer. Strahlenther Onkol: Organ Dtsch Rontgengesellschaft [et al]. 2004;180:497–501. doi:10.1007/s00066-004-1208-3.CrossRef

74.

Murakami M, Miyamoto T, Iida T, Tsukada H, Watanabe M, Shida M, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography and tumor marker CA125 for detection of recurrence in epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer: Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2006;16 Suppl 1:99–107. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1438.2006.00471.x.CrossRef

75.

Thrall MM, DeLoia JA, Gallion H, Avril N. Clinical use of combined positron emission tomography and computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) in recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;105:17–22. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2006.10.060.PubMedCrossRef

76.

Bristow RE, del Carmen MG, Pannu HK, Cohade C, Zahurak ML, Fishman EK, et al. Clinically occult recurrent ovarian cancer: patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery using combined PET/CT. Gynecol Oncol. 2003;90:519–28.PubMedCrossRef

77.

Ebina Y, Watari H, Kaneuchi M, Takeda M, Hosaka M, Kudo M, et al. Impact of FDG PET in optimizing patient selection for cytoreductive surgery in recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:446–51. doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2610-9.PubMedCrossRef

78.

Du XL, Jiang T, Sheng XG, Li QS, Wang C, Yu H. PET/CT scanning guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy in treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:3551–6. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.03.016.PubMedCrossRef

79.

Mansueto M, Grimaldi A, Mangili G, Picchio M, Giovacchini G, Vigano R, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography introduction in the clinical management of patients with suspected recurrence of ovarian cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Eur J Cancer Care. 2009;18:612–9. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2354.2008.00945.x.CrossRef

80.

Musto A, Grassetto G, Marzola MC, Rampin L, Chondrogiannis S, Maffione AM, et al. Management of epithelial ovarian cancer from diagnosis to restaging: an overview of the role of imaging techniques with particular regard to the contribution of 18F-FDG PET/CT. Nucl Med Commun. 2014;35:588–97. doi:10.1097/MNM.0000000000000091.PubMedCrossRef

81.

Vergote I, Amant F, Kristensen G, Ehlen T, Reed NS, Casado A. Primary surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by interval debulking surgery in advanced ovarian cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47 Suppl 3:S88–92. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(11)70152-6.PubMedCrossRef

82.

Risum S, Loft A, Engelholm SA, Hogdall E, Berthelsen AK, Nedergaard L, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography predictors of overall survival in stage IIIC/IV ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer: Off J Int Gynecol Cancer Soc. 2012;22:1163–9. doi:10.1097/IGC.0b013e3182606ecb.CrossRef

83.

Chung HH, Kwon HW, Kang KW, Park NH, Song YS, Chung JK, et al. Prognostic value of preoperative metabolic tumor volume and total lesion glycolysis in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:1966–72. doi:10.1245/s10434-011-2153-x.PubMedCrossRef

84.

Liao S, Lan X, Cao G, Yuan H, Zhang Y. Prognostic predictive value of total lesion glycolysis from 18F-FDG PET/CT in post-surgical patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38:715–20. doi:10.1097/RLU.0b013e31829f57fa.PubMedCrossRef

85.

Boers-Sonderen MJ, de Geus-Oei LF, Desar IM, van der Graaf WT, Oyen WJ, Ottevanger PB, et al. Temsirolimus and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) combination therapy in breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer: phase Ib results and prediction of clinical outcome with FDG-PET/CT. Target Oncol. 2014. doi:10.1007/s11523-014-0309-x.

86.

Kurosaki H, Oriuchi N, Okazaki A, Tamaki T, Uki A, Izuta M, et al. Prognostic value of FDG-PET in patients with ovarian carcinoma following surgical treatment. Ann Nucl Med. 2006;20:171–4.PubMedCrossRef

87.

Risum S, Loft A, Hogdall C, Berthelsen AK, Hogdall E, Lundvall L, et al. Standardized FDG uptake as a prognostic variable and as a predictor of incomplete cytoreduction in primary advanced ovarian cancer. Acta Oncol. 2011;50:415–9. doi:10.3109/0284186X.2010.500296.PubMedCrossRef

88.

Trencsényi G, Márián T, Lajtos I, Krasznai Z, Balkay L, Emri M, et al. 18FDG,[18F] FLT,[18F] FAZA, and 11C-methionine are suitable tracers for the diagnosis and in vivo follow-up of the efficacy of chemotherapy by miniPET in both multidrug resistant and sensitive human gynecologic tumor xenografts. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014.

89.

Jensen MM, Erichsen KD, Johnbeck CB, Bjorkling F, Madsen J, Jensen PB, et al. [18F]FDG and [18F]FLT positron emission tomography imaging following treatment with belinostat in human ovary cancer xenografts in mice. BMC Cancer. 2013;13:168. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-13-168.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

90.

Leyton J, Smith G, Lees M, Perumal M, Nguyen QD, Aigbirhio FI, et al. Noninvasive imaging of cell proliferation following mitogenic extracellular kinase inhibition by PD0325901. Mol Cancer Ther. 2008;7:3112–21. doi:10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-0264.PubMedCrossRef

91.

Buck AK, Halter G, Schirrmeister H, Kotzerke J, Wurziger I, Glatting G, et al. Imaging proliferation in lung tumors with PET: 18F-FLT versus 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med: Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2003;44:1426–31.

92.

Munk Jensen M, Erichsen KD, Bjorkling F, Madsen J, Jensen PB, Sehested M, et al. Imaging of treatment response to the combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel in human ovarian cancer xenograft tumors in mice using FDG and FLT PET. PLoS One. 2013;8, e85126. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085126.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

93.

Perumal M, Stronach EA, Gabra H, Aboagye EO. Evaluation of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose- and 3′-deoxy-3′-[18F]fluorothymidine-positron emission tomography as biomarkers of therapy response in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Mol Imaging Biol: MIB : Off Publ Acad Mol Imaging. 2012;14:753–61. doi:10.1007/s11307-012-0554-2.CrossRef

94.

Aide N, Kinross K, Cullinane C, Roselt P, Waldeck K, Neels O, et al. 18F-FLT PET as a surrogate marker of drug efficacy during mTOR inhibition by everolimus in a preclinical cisplatin-resistant ovarian tumor model. J Nucl Med: Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2010;51:1559–64. doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.073288.CrossRef

95.

Niu G, Li Z, Cao Q, Chen X. Monitoring therapeutic response of human ovarian cancer to 17-DMAG by noninvasive PET imaging with (64)Cu-DOTA-trastuzumab. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:1510–9. doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1158-1.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

96.

Heskamp S, Laverman P, Rosik D, Boschetti F, van der Graaf WT, Oyen WJ, et al. Imaging of human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 expression with 18F-labeled affibody molecule ZHER2:2395 in a mouse model for ovarian cancer. J Nucl Med: Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2012;53:146–53. doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.093047.CrossRef

97.

van der Bilt AR, van Scheltinga AG T, Timmer-Bosscha H, Schroder CP, Pot L, Kosterink JG, et al. Measurement of tumor VEGF-A levels with 89Zr-bevacizumab PET as an early biomarker for the antiangiogenic effect of everolimus treatment in an ovarian cancer xenograft model. Clin Cancer Res: Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2012;18:6306–14. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-0406.CrossRef

98.

Partovi S, Kohan A, Rubbert C, Vercher-Conejero JL, Gaeta C, Yuh R, et al. Clinical oncologic applications of PET/MRI: a new horizon. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;4:202–12.PubMedPubMedCentral

99.

Hirsch FW, Sattler B, Sorge I, Kurch L, Viehweger A, Ritter L, et al. PET/MR in children. Initial clinical experience in paediatric oncology using an integrated PET/MR scanner. Pediatr Radiol. 2013;43:860–75. doi:10.1007/s00247-012-2570-4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

100.

Nakajo K, Tatsumi M, Inoue A, Isohashi K, Higuchi I, Kato H, et al. Diagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging fusion images of gynecological malignant tumors: comparison with positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Jpn J Radiol. 2010;28:95–100. doi:10.1007/s11604-009-0387-3.PubMedCrossRef

101.

Beiderwellen K, Grueneisen J, Ruhlmann V, Buderath P, Aktas B, Heusch P, et al. [18F]FDG PET/MRI vs. PET/CT for whole-body staging in patients with recurrent malignancies of the female pelvis: initial results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:56–65. doi:10.1007/s00259-014-2902-8.PubMedCrossRef

102.

Queiroz MA, Kubik-Huch RA, Hauser N, Freiwald-Chilla B, von Schulthess G, Froehlich JM, et al. PET/MRI and PET/CT in advanced gynaecological tumours: initial experience and comparison. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:2222–30. doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3657-8.PubMedCrossRef

103.

Grueneisen J, Schaarschmidt BM, Heubner M, Suntharalingam S, Milk I, Kinner S, et al. Implementation of FAST-PET/MRI for whole-body staging of female patients with recurrent pelvic malignancies: a comparison to PET/CT. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84:2097–102. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2015.08.010.PubMedCrossRef

Title: An update on the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer
Authors: Benjapa Khiewvan
Drew A. Torigian
Sahra Emamzadehfard
Koosha Paydary
Ali Salavati
Sina Houshmand
Thomas J. Werner
Abass Alavi
Publication date: 01-06-2017
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 6/2017
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3638-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

An update on the role of PET/CT and PET/MRI in ovarian cancer

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2017

Central noradrenaline transporter availability in highly obese, non-depressed individuals

In memoriam Professor Jan van der Schoot (1927–2017)

68Ga-PSMA PET/CT: Joint EANM and SNMMI procedure guideline for prostate cancer imaging: version 1.0

The “reset button” revisited: why high activity 131I therapy of advanced differentiated thyroid cancer after dosimetry is advantageous for patients

Refining prognosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma through incorporation of metabolic imaging biomarkers

Test–retest measurements of dopamine D1-type receptors using simultaneous PET/MRI imaging