Biological image-guided radiotherapy in rectal cancer: Is there a role for FMISO or FLT, next to FDG?

Genotypic characteristics of resistant tumors to pre-operative ionizing radiation in rectal cancer

“…Tumors with higher baseline tumor-muscle activity ratios (suggesting hypoxia) in the pre-treatment PET scan were shown to have a poor response to radiation [133] . Other agents tested in different studies have been less useful probably as a result of technical limitations [134] . Further evidence of the role of hypoxia in response to IR was demonstrated by the fact that higher levels of HIF-1 (hypoxia inducible protein factor 1, a protein that increases in oxygen deprived tissues) predicts poor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with rectal cancer [135] .…”

Positron emission tomography to assess hypoxia and perfusion in lung cancer

“…Koh et al [221] , Liu et al [222] , Yeh et al [223] , Rischin et al [224] , Bentzen et al [125] , Rajendran et al [225] , Gagel et al [126] , Rajendran et al [226] , Hicks et al [227] , Lawrentschuk et al [200] , Loi et al [228] , Thorwarth et al [229] , Rajendran et al [230] , Rischin et al [231] , Thorwarth et al [232] , Zimny et al [124] , Eschmann et al [233] , Gagel et al [202] , Thorwarth et al [234] , Thorwarth et al [235] , Lee et al [236] , Lin et al [237] , Nehmeh et al [238] , Roels et al [239] , Dirix et al [240] , Lee et al [241] , Mortensen et al [127] , Wang et al [56] , Abolmaali et al [242] , Bowen et al [138] , Eary et al [243] , Kikuchi et al [244] , Hugonnet et al [131] , Yamane et al [245] , Mammar et al [246] , Zips et al [247] , Cheng et al [217] , Henriques de Figueiredo et al [248] , Okamoto et al [249] , Sato et al [218] , Segard et al [250] , Tachibana et al [251] , Norikane et al [219] [ Dubois et al …”

Interobserver Agreement of Qualitative Analysis and Tumor Delineation of 18F-Fluoromisonidazole and 3′-Deoxy-3′-18F-Fluorothymidine PET Images in Lung Cancer

“…GTV using 18 F-FLT to define the esophagus could change the treatment planning and doses delivered to organs at risk, according to Han et al (10). In rectal tumors, 18 F-FMISO was not specific to the tumor volume, and the volume-as defined by 18 F-FLT-decreased more rapidly during chemoradiation than did the 18 F-FDG volume (11).…”

“…Therefore, 18 F-FMISO has been proposed to achieve such increases in the dose of radiotherapy in head and neck cancers (8,9). GTV was assessed on 18 F-FLT images obtained from cases of esophagus cancer (10) and on 18 F-FLT and 18 F-FMISO images obtained from cases of rectal cancer (11). In these studies, the GTV measurements were different between 18 F-FDG and 18 F-FLT or 18 F-FMISO.…”