2014
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-014-2826-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

FDG PET/CT methodology for evaluation of treatment response in lymphoma: from “graded visual analysis” and “semiquantitative SUVmax” to global disease burden assessment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

1
23
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this study, 5p-DS and rPET were obtained considering the same reference organ (liver parenchyma). Recent studies demonstrated that also semi-quantitative parameters (such as lesion SUVmax) have a prognostic significance in patients with HL [7,9,10]. In our population, rPET was documented to be a prognostic factor in patients with HL undergoing interim FDG-PET/CT.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this study, 5p-DS and rPET were obtained considering the same reference organ (liver parenchyma). Recent studies demonstrated that also semi-quantitative parameters (such as lesion SUVmax) have a prognostic significance in patients with HL [7,9,10]. In our population, rPET was documented to be a prognostic factor in patients with HL undergoing interim FDG-PET/CT.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%
“…With 5p-DS, target lesion uptake (usually the hottest lesion described) is compared with liver uptake (chosen as standard reference): a target lesion uptake higher than the liver (score 4 or 5) is considered positive and is a marker of aggressive disease [4]. Nevertheless, 5p-DS still shows many of the limits of visual image interpretation (such as inter-observer disagreement) [5,7]. Moreover, it is still being debated which the best intra-patient reference organ is (liver or mediastinal blood pool) [8].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, they provide measures of cancer reflecting metabolically active cells. Thus, these measurements may be clinically more relevant than SUVmax or SUVpeak representing only minute volumes of cancerous tissue with high activity, whereas the entire volume of cancer and its overall activity is a conceptually more truthful measure of the cancerous burden (Basu et al, 2014;Boellaard et al, 2015;Ziai et al, 2016). Volumetric analysis by manual processing is not standardized and is a time-consuming clinical application.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several comprehensive reviews covering novel approaches to quantification techniques have been published recently together with letters of concern regarding the current use and misuse of quantification in PET imaging. [58][59][60][61][62][63] It is pertinent to mention here the concept of global disease assessment, which was introduced 20 years ago by Alavi and colleagues 64 for the assessment of brain metabolism. The proposed method combines volumetric and metabolic data into a unique parameter, a global disease activity score based on total lesion glycolysis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%