Community Forum top_calendar.gif top_members.gif top_faq.gif top_search.gif top_home.gif    

Go Back   Community Forum > The Internet Medical Journal > News
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 30th, 2004, 19:23
sysadmin sysadmin is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: 2001
Posts: 1,085
FDG PET Effective in Determining the Response to Therapy in Gastroesophageal Cancer

Sequential dynamic FDG-PET scans were performed in 13 patients with locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer (T2-3N0-1M0-1a) treated with neoadjuvant cisplatin and gemcitabine plus granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating growth factor at a three weekly schedule. The standard FDG-PET method, nonlinear regression (NLR), was compared with computed tomography (CT), endoscopic-ultrasound (EUS), and histopathology as well as with 21 simplified analytical FDG-PET methods. RESULTS: Five out of 12 operated tumors responded histopathologically with less than 10% residual tumorcells (42%). These had a higher decrease in FDG uptake compared with nonresponders (P=0.008). Early (after two cycles) and late (after completed induction therapy) response evaluation showed a specificity of 86% and 100%, respectively, and a sensitivity of 100%. Both FDG-PET and EUS were superior to CT. From 21 methods analyzing FDG uptake, the quantitative Patlak analysis, the simplified kinetic method (SKM), and the semiquantitative standardized uptake value corrected for bodyweight (SUV-BW) seemed to correlate best with NLR. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET reliably predicted response in LAGEC. FDG-PET measurements using Patlak analysis or the more clinical applicable SKM and SUV-BW were acceptable alternatives to NLR.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=14630513

Mol Imaging Biol. 2003 Sep-Oct;5(5):337-46.

Kroep JR, Van Groeningen CJ, Cuesta MA, Craanen ME, Hoekstra OS, Comans EF, Bloemena E, Hoekstra CJ, Golding RP, Twisk JW, Peters GJ, Pinedo HM, Lammertsma AA.

Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PET Useful in the Follow-up of Thyroid Cancer Patients sysadmin News 0 July 9th, 2003 11:41
PET Improves Management of Patients With Suspected Colorectal Cancer Recurrence sysadmin News 0 July 8th, 2003 16:43
Meta-analysis Concludes FDG PET is Superior to Conventional Imaging in Lung Cancer sysadmin News 0 July 5th, 2003 09:44
August 2002 sysadmin News 0 September 2nd, 2002 20:44
July 2002 sysadmin News 0 August 12th, 2002 20:08


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:45.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.



Be careful about reading health books. You may die of a misprint.  
- Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)

We are committed to your good health. That means that while we provide editorial medical information, we must insist that you work with your own doctor in regards to your personal health issues. All content on Medjournal.Com is strictly editorial. It constitutes medical opinion, NOT ADVICE. We do not endorse or recommend the content of Medjournal.com or the sites that are linked FROM or TO Medjournal.com. Use common sense by consulting with your doctor before making any lifestyle changes or other medical decisions based on the content of these web pages. Medjournal.Com and the Internet Medical Journal shall not be held liable for any errors in content, advertising, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.