2009
DOI: 10.1200/jco.2008.18.2238
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prospective Evaluation of Whole-Body Cancer Screening With Multiple Modalities Including [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in a Healthy Population: A Preliminary Report

Abstract: While FDG-PET alone is insufficient, whole-body cancer screening with selected modalities including FDG-PET has initial performance supporting possible utility by detecting a wide variety of early-stage cancers with reasonable sensitivity. However, the detection of many indolent cancers and false positives necessitate continuing study for appropriate evaluation.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
30
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
30
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…FDG-PET was performed using an SHR-92000 scanner (Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., Hamamatsu, Japan), starting 60 min after an injection of 3 MBq/kg body weight FDG to a subject who had fasted for at least 5 hours [16]. Serum glucose levels were measured just before the FDG injection.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…FDG-PET was performed using an SHR-92000 scanner (Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., Hamamatsu, Japan), starting 60 min after an injection of 3 MBq/kg body weight FDG to a subject who had fasted for at least 5 hours [16]. Serum glucose levels were measured just before the FDG injection.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although PET has recently been proposed as a promising cancer screening test [47,48], the utility of PET in gastric cancer screening has not been evaluated. For gastric cancer screening, the usefulness of PET is limited because of physiological FDG uptake in the normal gastric wall and differences of FDG uptake according to the histological type of the tumor [1,2].…”
Section: Efficacy Of Pet For the Screening Of Gastric Cancermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] Table 1 summarizes the findings of these reports. The rate of detected incidental foci ranges from 3.0% to 12.3%.…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…[8][9][10][11][12][13] The detection rate of IC ranges from 0.9% to 4.4%, [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] and a few reports have described a wider range (0.1-4.4%) of false-negative findings. [13][14][15] However, the survival of patients with IC has not been detailed. Differences in detection rates and other findings arise owing to many factors, including country, age, symptomatic or asymptomatic individuals, 18 F-FDG PET or PET/CT, judgment criteria, method and period of follow-up.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%