Role of 18F-FDG PET/CT for staging and assessment of therapy response in aggressive forms of malignant lymphomas


Authors: Lenka Henzlová 1;  Pavel Koranda 1;  Tomáš Papajík 2
Authors‘ workplace: Klinika nukleární medicíny, LF UP a FN Olomouc 1;  Hemato-onkologická klinika, LF UP a FN Olomouc 2
Published in: NuklMed 2016;5:55-61
Category: Review Article

Overview

The treatment regimen in patients with lymphoma is selected based on the staging of the disease and prognostic factors, hence imaging methods play a central role in this process. They also have a key role in response assessment. The approach to reading and reporting positron emission tomography (PET) combined with computed tomography (PET/CT) in patients with lymphoma should be revised considering advances in recent knowledge about the disease biology and new methods of treatment. The International Harmonization Project (IHP) first published guidelines about the application of PET using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) in lymphoma in 2007. At a conference in Lugano, the panel of experts proposed new recommendations based on the latest findings in 2013. PET/CT is included into staging of patients with 18F-FDG-avid lymphomas according to these recommendations. Biopsy can be omitted in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma by evaluating bone marrow involvement using PET/CT. The Deauville 5-point scale is recommended in response assessment. The standardization of PET/CT methods is mandatory for quantitative analysis and desirable for interpretation in the context of trials.

Key Words:
18F-FDG PET/CT, lymphomas, staging, therapy response, Lugano classification


Sources

1. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: Consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:571-578

2. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:579-586

3. Meignan M, Gallamini A, Haioun C. Report on the First International Workshop on Interim-PET-Scan in Lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma 2009;50:1257-1260

4. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3059-3068

5. Barrington SF, Mikhaeel NG, Kostakoglu L et al. Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3048-3058

6. El-Galaly TC, d’Amore F, Mylam KJ et al. Routine bone marrow biopsy has little or no therapeutic consequence for positron emission tomography/computed tomography–staged treatment-naive patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:4508-4514

7. Khan AB, Barrington SF, Mikhaeel NG et al. PET-CT staging of DLBCL accurately identifies and provides new insight into the clinical significance of bone marrow involvement. Blood 2013;122:61-67

8. Cashen AF, Dehdashti F, Luo J et al. (18)FDG PET/CT for early response assessment in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: Poor predictive value of International Harmonization Project interpretation. J Nucl Med 2011;52:386-392

9. Barrington SF, Qian W, Somer EJ et al. Concordance between four European centres of PET reporting criteria designed for use in multicentre trials in Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37:1824-1833

10. Barrington SF, Fosse P, Withofs et al. Recommendations to stage and assess the response to therapy of lymphomas with [18F]FDG-PET-CT. Médecine Nucléaire 2016;40:55-64

11. Lin C, Itti E, Haioun C et al. Early 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1626–1632

12. Casasnovas RO, Meignan M, Berriolo-Riedinger A et al. SUVmax reduction improves early prognosis value of interim positron emission tomography scans in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood 2011;118:37-43

13. Henzlová L, Kapitáňová Z, Buriánková E et al. Použití intravenózní kontrastní látky při interim 18F-FDG PET/CT u pacientů s non-hodgkinskými lymfomy – je nutné u všech pacientů? NuklMed 2012;1(S1):6

14. Haioun C, Itti E, Rahmouni A et al. F-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in aggressive lymphoma: An early prognostic tool for predicting patient outcome. Blood 2005;106:1376-1381

15. Pregno P, Chiappella A, Bello M et al. Interim 18-FDG-PET/CT failed to predict the outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients treated at the diagnosis with rituximab-CHOP. Blood 2012;119:2066-2073

16. Dührsen U, Hüttmann A, Jöckel KH et al. Positron emission tomography guided therapy of aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas: The PETAL trial. Leuk Lymphoma 2009;50:1757-1760

17. Mikhaeel NG, Smith D, Dunn JT et al. Combination of baseline metabolic tumor volume and early response on PET/CT improves progression-free survival prediction in DLBCL. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016;43:1209-1219

18. Gallicchio R, Mansueto G, Simeon V et al. F-18 FDG PET/CT quantization parameters as predictors of outcome in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Eur J Haematol. 2014;92:382-389

19. Zijlstra JM, Lindauer-van der Werf G, Hoekstra OS et al. F-18-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for post-treatment evaluation of malignant lymphoma: A systematic review. Haematologica 2006;91:522-529

20. Engert A, Haverkamp H, Kobe C et al. Reduced-intensity chemotherapy and PET-guided radiotherapy in patients with advanced stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HD15 trial): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2012;379:1791-1799

21. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF et al. Early detection of relapse by whole-body positron emission tomography in the follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s disease. Ann Oncol 2003;14:123-130

22. Zinzani PL, Stefoni V, Tani M et al. Role of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the follow-up of lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1781-1787

Labels
Nuclear medicine Radiodiagnostics Radiotherapy
Login
Forgotten password

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account

Forgotten password

Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.

Login

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account