Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

FET and FDOPA PET Imaging in Glioma

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Glioma Imaging

Abstract

Metabolic imaging techniques such as positron emission tomography (PET) can characterize specific metabolic and cellular features of gliomas which may provide clinically relevant information beyond structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In contrast to the widely used PET tracer 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG), the uptake of radiolabeled amino acids such as O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET) or 3,4-dihydroxy-6-[18F]-fluoro-L-phenylalanine (FDOPA) is low in normal brain tissue, and brain tumors can be depicted with high contrast. Like FDG, these amino acid tracers are able to cross the intact blood-brain barrier, which allows the depiction of the tumor extent beyond the contrast-enhancing region of conventional MRI. Recently, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) working group – an international effort to develop new standardized response criteria for clinical trials in brain tumors – has recommended the additional use of amino acid PET imaging for brain tumor management, especially for the delineation of the tumor extent, differentiation of treatment-related changes from tumor progression, and the assessment of treatment response.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Langen KJ, Galldiks N, Hattingen E, Shah NJ. Advances in neuro-oncology imaging. Nat Rev Neurol. 2017;13(5):279–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Langen KJ, Galldiks N. Update on amino acid PET of brain tumours. Curr Opin Neurol. 2018;31(4):354–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Herholz K, Langen KJ, Schiepers C, Mountz JM. Brain tumors. Semin Nucl Med. 2012;42(6):356–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Albert NL, Weller M, Suchorska B, Galldiks N, Soffietti R, Kim MM, et al. Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology working group and European Association for Neuro-Oncology recommendations for the clinical use of PET imaging in gliomas. Neuro-Oncology. 2016;18(9):1199–208.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Bergström M, Collins VP, Ehrin E, Ericson K, Eriksson L, Greitz T, et al. Discrepancies in brain tumor extent as shown by computed tomography and positron emission tomography using [68Ga]EDTA, [11C]glucose, and [11C]methionine. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1983;7:1062–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Galldiks N, Langen KJ, Pope WB. From the clinician’s point of view - what is the status quo of positron emission tomography in patients with brain tumors? Neuro-Oncology. 2015;17(11):1434–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Huang C, McConathy J. Radiolabeled amino acids for oncologic imaging. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(7):1007–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Langen KJ, Hamacher K, Weckesser M, Floeth F, Stoffels G, Bauer D, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine: uptake mechanisms and clinical applications. Nucl Med Biol. 2006;33(3):287–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wester HJ, Herz M, Weber W, Heiss P, Senekowitsch-Schmidtke R, Schwaiger M, et al. Synthesis and radiopharmacology of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine for tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 1999;40(1):205–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Langen KJ, Tonn JC, Weller M, Galldiks N. Letter to the Editor: “The role of imaging in the management of progressive glioblastoma. A systematic review and evidence-based clinical practice guideline” [J Neurooncol 2014; 118:435-460]. J Neuro-Oncol. 2014;120:665–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Langen KJ, Jarosch M, Mühlensiepen H, Hamacher K, Broer S, Jansen P, et al. Comparison of fluorotyrosines and methionine uptake in F98 rat gliomas. Nucl Med Biol. 2003;30(5):501–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Weber WA, Wester HJ, Grosu AL, Herz M, Dzewas B, Feldmann HJ, et al. O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine and L-[methyl-11C]methionine uptake in brain tumours: initial results of a comparative study. Eur J Nucl Med. 2000;27(5):542–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Grosu AL, Astner ST, Riedel E, Nieder C, Wiedenmann N, Heinemann F, et al. An interindividual comparison of O-(2- [(18)F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET)- and L-[methyl-(11)C]methionine (MET)-PET in patients with brain gliomas and metastases. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81(4):1049–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Swissmedic. Swiss agency for therapeutic products. J Swissmedic. 2014;13:651.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Becherer A, Karanikas G, Szabo M, Zettinig G, Asenbaum S, Marosi C, et al. Brain tumour imaging with PET: a comparison between [18F]fluorodopa and [11C]methionine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(11):1561–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kratochwil C, Combs SE, Leotta K, Afshar-Oromieh A, Rieken S, Debus J, et al. Intra-individual comparison of (18)F-FET and (18)F-DOPA in PET imaging of recurrent brain tumors. Neuro-Oncology. 2014;16(3):434–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Okubo S, Zhen HN, Kawai N, Nishiyama Y, Haba R, Tamiya T. Correlation of L-methyl-11C-methionine (MET) uptake with L-type amino acid transporter 1 in human gliomas. J Neuro-Oncol. 2010;99(2):217–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wiriyasermkul P, Nagamori S, Tominaga H, Oriuchi N, Kaira K, Nakao H, et al. Transport of 3-fluoro-L-alpha-methyl-tyrosine by tumor-upregulated L-type amino acid transporter 1: a cause of the tumor uptake in PET. J Nucl Med. 2012;53(8):1253–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Youland RS, Kitange GJ, Peterson TE, Pafundi DH, Ramiscal JA, Pokorny JL, et al. The role of LAT1 in (18)F-DOPA uptake in malignant gliomas. J Neuro-Oncol. 2013;111:11–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Papin-Michault C, Bonnetaud C, Dufour M, Almairac F, Coutts M, Patouraux S, et al. Study of LAT1 expression in brain metastases: towards a better understanding of the results of positron emission tomography using amino acid tracers. PLoS One. 2016;11(6):e0157139.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Haining Z, Kawai N, Miyake K, Okada M, Okubo S, Zhang X, et al. Relation of LAT1/4F2hc expression with pathological grade, proliferation and angiogenesis in human gliomas. BMC Clin Pathol. 2012;12:4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Juhasz C, Dwivedi S, Kamson DO, Michelhaugh SK, Mittal S. Comparison of amino acid positron emission tomographic radiotracers for molecular imaging of primary and metastatic brain tumors. Mol Imaging. 2014;13:7290.2014.00015.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Cicone F, Filss CP, Minniti G, Rossi-Espagnet C, Papa A, Scaringi C, et al. Volumetric assessment of recurrent or progressive gliomas: comparison between F-DOPA PET and perfusion-weighted MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(6):905–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Stoffels G, Hutterer M, Rapp M, Sabel M, et al. Diagnosis of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma using O-(2-[(18)F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(5):685–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Filss C, Rapp M, Blau T, Tscherpel C, et al. The use of dynamic O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine PET in the diagnosis of patients with progressive and recurrent glioma. Neuro-Oncology. 2015;17(9):1293–300.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Calcagni ML, Galli G, Giordano A, Taralli S, Anile C, Niesen A, et al. Dynamic O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (F-18 FET) PET for glioma grading: assessment of individual probability of malignancy. Clin Nucl Med. 2011;36(10):841–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Albert NL, Winkelmann I, Suchorska B, Wenter V, Schmid-Tannwald C, Mille E, et al. Early static (18)F-FET-PET scans have a higher accuracy for glioma grading than the standard 20-40 min scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(6):1105–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jansen NL, Suchorska B, Wenter V, Schmid-Tannwald C, Todica A, Eigenbrod S, et al. Prognostic significance of dynamic 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed astrocytic high-grade glioma. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(1):9–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jansen NL, Suchorska B, Wenter V, Eigenbrod S, Schmid-Tannwald C, Zwergal A, et al. Dynamic 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed astrocytic low-grade glioma identifies high-risk patients. J Nucl Med. 2014;55(2):198–203.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Schiepers C, Chen W, Cloughesy T, Dahlbom M, Huang SC. 18F-FDOPA kinetics in brain tumors. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(10):1651–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Chen W, Silverman DH, Delaloye S, Czernin J, Kamdar N, Pope W, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET imaging of brain tumors: comparison study with 18F-FDG PET and evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(6):904–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Nomura Y, Asano Y, Shinoda J, Yano H, Ikegame Y, Kawasaki T, et al. Characteristics of time-activity curves obtained from dynamic (11)C-methionine PET in common primary brain tumors. J Neuro-Oncol. 2018;138(3):649–58.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Moulin-Romsée G, D’Hondt E, de Groot T, Goffin J, Sciot R, Mortelmans L, et al. Non-invasive grading of brain tumours using dynamic amino acid PET imaging: does it work for 11C-methionine? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(12):2082–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pauleit D, Stoffels G, Bachofner A, Floeth FW, Sabel M, Herzog H, et al. Comparison of (18)F-FET and (18)F-FDG PET in brain tumors. Nucl Med Biol. 2009;36:779–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rapp M, Heinzel A, Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Felsberg J, Ewelt C, et al. Diagnostic performance of 18F-FET PET in newly diagnosed cerebral lesions suggestive of glioma. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(2):229–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Galldiks N, Stoffels G, Ruge MI, Rapp M, Sabel M, Reifenberger G, et al. Role of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET as a diagnostic tool for detection of malignant progression in patients with low-grade glioma. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(12):2046–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kunz M, Thon N, Eigenbrod S, Hartmann C, Egensperger R, Herms J, et al. Hot spots in dynamic (18)FET-PET delineate malignant tumor parts within suspected WHO grade II gliomas. Neuro-Oncology. 2011;13(3):307–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Thon N, Kunz M, Lemke L, Jansen NL, Eigenbrod S, Kreth S, et al. Dynamic 18F-FET PET in suspected WHO grade II gliomas defines distinct biological subgroups with different clinical courses. Int J Cancer. 2015;136(9):2132–45.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Unterrainer M, Schweisthal F, Suchorska B, Wenter V, Schmid-Tannwald C, Fendler WP, et al. Serial 18F-FET PET imaging of primarily 18F-FET-negative glioma: does it make sense? J Nucl Med. 2016;57(8):1177–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Suchorska B, Giese A, Biczok A, Unterrainer M, Weller M, Drexler M, et al. Identification of time-to-peak on dynamic 18F-FET-PET as a prognostic marker specifically in IDH1/2 mutant diffuse astrocytoma. Neuro-Oncology. 2018;20(2):279–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kunz M, Albert NL, Unterrainer M, la Fougere C, Egensperger R, Schuller U, et al. Dynamic 18F-FET PET is a powerful imaging biomarker in gadolinium-negative gliomas. Neuro-Oncology. 2018;

    Google Scholar 

  42. Pafundi DH, Laack NN, Youland RS, Parney IF, Lowe VJ, Giannini C, et al. Biopsy validation of 18F-DOPA PET and biodistribution in gliomas for neurosurgical planning and radiotherapy target delineation: results of a prospective pilot study. Neuro-Oncology. 2013;15(8):1058–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Munck Af Rosenschold P, Costa J, Engelholm SA, Lundemann MJ, Law I, Ohlhues L, et al. Impact of [18F]-fluoro-ethyl-tyrosine PET imaging on target definition for radiation therapy of high-grade glioma. Neuro-Oncology. 2015;15(5):757–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Piroth MD, Pinkawa M, Holy R, Stoffels G, Demirel C, Attieh C, et al. Integrated-boost IMRT or 3-D-CRT using FET-PET based auto-contoured target volume delineation for glioblastoma multiforme--a dosimetric comparison. Radiat Oncol. 2009;4:57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Rieken S, Habermehl D, Giesel FL, Hoffmann C, Burger U, Rief H, et al. Analysis of FET-PET imaging for target volume definition in patients with gliomas treated with conformal radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2013;109(3):487–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Weber DC, Zilli T, Buchegger F, Casanova N, Haller G, Rouzaud M, et al. [(18)F]Fluoroethyltyrosine- positron emission tomography-guided radiotherapy for high-grade glioma. Radiat Oncol. 2008;3:44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Piroth MD, Pinkawa M, Holy R, Klotz J, Schaar S, Stoffels G, et al. Integrated boost IMRT with FET-PET-adapted local dose escalation in glioblastomas. Results of a prospective phase II study. Strahlenther Onkol. 2012;188(4):334–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kosztyla R, Chan EK, Hsu F, Wilson D, Ma R, Cheung A, et al. High-grade glioma radiation therapy target volumes and patterns of failure obtained from magnetic resonance imaging and 18F-FDOPA positron emission tomography delineations from multiple observers. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87(5):1100–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Lundemann M, Costa JC, Law I, Engelholm SA, Muhic A, Poulsen HS, et al. Patterns of failure for patients with glioblastoma following O-(2-[(18)F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET- and MRI-guided radiotherapy. Radiother Oncol. 2017;122(3):380–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Piroth MD, Galldiks N, Pinkawa M, Holy R, Stoffels G, Ermert J, et al. Relapse patterns after radiochemotherapy of glioblastoma with FET PET-guided boost irradiation and simulation to optimize radiation target volume. Radiat Oncol. 2016;11:87.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Popp I, Bott S, Mix M, Oehlke O, Schimek-Jasch T, Nieder C, et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI and ADC versus FET-PET and GdT1w-MRI for gross tumor volume (GTV) delineation in re-irradiation of recurrent glioblastoma. Radiother Oncol. 2019;130:121–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Oehlke O, Mix M, Graf E, Schimek-Jasch T, Nestle U, Gotz I, et al. Amino-acid PET versus MRI guided re-irradiation in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GLIAA) - protocol of a randomized phase II trial (NOA 10/ARO 2013-1). BMC Cancer. 2016;16(1):769.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Dunet V, Rossier C, Buck A, Stupp R, Prior JO. Performance of 18F-fluoro-ethyl-tyrosine (18F-FET) PET for the differential diagnosis of primary brain tumor: a systematic review and metaanalysis. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:207–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Hutterer M, Nowosielski M, Putzer D, Jansen NL, Seiz M, Schocke M, et al. [18F]-fluoro-ethyl-L-tyrosine PET: a valuable diagnostic tool in neuro-oncology, but not all that glitters is glioma. Neuro-Oncology. 2013;15(3):341–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Langen KJ, Galldiks N. Reply to “[18F]-fluoro-ethyl-L-tyrosine PET: a valuable diagnostic tool in neuro-oncology, but not all that glitters is glioma” by Hutterer et al. Neuro-Oncology. 2013;15(7):816–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Salber D, Stoffels G, Pauleit D, Oros-Peusquens AM, Shah NJ, Klauth P, et al. Differential uptake of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine, L-3H-methionine, and 3H-deoxyglucose in brain abscesses. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:2056–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Sala Q, Metellus P, Taieb D, Kaphan E, Figarella-Branger D, Guedj E. 18F-DOPA, a clinically available PET tracer to study brain inflammation? Clin Nucl Med. 2014;39(4):e283–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Hutterer M, Ebner Y, Riemenschneider MJ, Willuweit A, McCoy M, Egger B, et al. Epileptic activity increases cerebral amino acid transport assessed by 18F-fluoroethyl-l-tyrosine amino acid PET: a potential brain tumor mimic. J Nucl Med. 2017;58(1):129–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Burghaus L, Kabbasch C, Deckert M, Ruge MI, Fink GR, Langen KJ, et al. FET PET in primary central nervous system vasculitis. Clin Nucl Med. 2018;43(9):e322–e3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Unterrainer M, Diekmann C, Dorostkar M, Vettermann FJ, Kumpfel T, Tonn JC, et al. Neurosarcoidosis mimics high-grade glioma in dynamic 18F-FET PET due to LAT expression. Clin Nucl Med. 2018;43(11):840–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Brandsma D, van den Bent MJ. Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse in the treatment of gliomas. Curr Opin Neurol. 2009;22(6):633–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Brandsma D, Stalpers L, Taal W, Sminia P, van den Bent MJ. Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9(5):453–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Young RJ, Gupta A, Shah AD, Graber JJ, Zhang Z, Shi W, et al. Potential utility of conventional MRI signs in diagnosing pseudoprogression in glioblastoma. Neurology. 2011;76(22):1918–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Radbruch A, Fladt J, Kickingereder P, Wiestler B, Nowosielski M, Baumer P, et al. Pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma: clinical relevance despite low incidence. Neuro-Oncology. 2015;17(1):151–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA, Cloughesy TF, Sorensen AG, Galanis E, et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(11):1963–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Stuplich M, Hadizadeh DR, Kuchelmeister K, Scorzin J, Filss C, Langen KJ, et al. Late and prolonged pseudoprogression in glioblastoma after treatment with lomustine and temozolomide. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(21):e180–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Shah AH, Snelling B, Bregy A, Patel PR, Tememe D, Bhatia R, et al. Discriminating radiation necrosis from tumor progression in gliomas: a systematic review what is the best imaging modality? J Neuro-Oncol. 2013;112(2):141–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Kumar AJ, Leeds NE, Fuller GN, Van Tassel P, Maor MH, Sawaya RE, et al. Malignant gliomas: MR imaging spectrum of radiation therapy- and chemotherapy-induced necrosis of the brain after treatment. Radiology. 2000;217(2):377–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Kebir S, Fimmers R, Galldiks N, Schafer N, Mack F, Schaub C, et al. Late pseudoprogression in glioblastoma: diagnostic value of dynamic O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(9):2190–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Stoffels G, Hutterer M, Rapp M, Sabel M, et al. Diagnosis of pseudoprogression in patients with glioblastoma using O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42(5):685–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Mihovilovic MI, Kertels O, Hanscheid H, Lohr M, Monoranu CM, Kleinlein I, et al. O-(2-((18)F)fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET for the differentiation of tumour recurrence from late pseudoprogression in glioblastoma. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2019;90(2):238–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Pöpperl G, Götz C, Rachinger W, Gildehaus FJ, Tonn JC, Tatsch K. Value of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET for the diagnosis of recurrent glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31(11):1464–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Rachinger W, Goetz C, Pöpperl G, Gildehaus FJ, Kreth FW, Holtmannspotter M, et al. Positron emission tomography with O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine versus magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of recurrent gliomas. Neurosurgery. 2005;57(3):505–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Herrmann K, Czernin J, Cloughesy T, Lai A, Pomykala KL, Benz MR, et al. Comparison of visual and semiquantitative analysis of 18F-FDOPA-PET/CT for recurrence detection in glioblastoma patients. Neuro-Oncology. 2014;16(4):603–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Karunanithi S, Sharma P, Kumar A, Khangembam BC, Bandopadhyaya GP, Kumar R, et al. Comparative diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced MRI and (18)F-FDOPA PET-CT in recurrent glioma. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(9):2628–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Galldiks N, Langen K, Holy R, Pinkawa M, Stoffels G, Nolte K, et al. Assessment of treatment response in patients with glioblastoma using [18F]Fluoroethyl-L-Tyrosine PET in comparison to MRI. J Nucl Med. 2012;53(7):1048–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Piroth MD, Pinkawa M, Holy R, Klotz J, Nussen S, Stoffels G, et al. Prognostic value of early [18F]fluoroethyltyrosine positron emission tomography after radiochemotherapy in glioblastoma multiforme. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80(1):176–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Wyss M, Hofer S, Bruehlmeier M, Hefti M, Uhlmann C, Bartschi E, et al. Early metabolic responses in temozolomide treated low-grade glioma patients. J Neuro-Oncol. 2009;95(1):87–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Roelcke U, Wyss MT, Nowosielski M, Ruda R, Roth P, Hofer S, et al. Amino acid positron emission tomography to monitor chemotherapy response and predict seizure control and progression-free survival in WHO grade II gliomas. Neuro-Oncology. 2016;18(5):744–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Suchorska B, Unterrainer M, Biczok A, Sosnova M, Forbrig R, Bartenstein P, et al. (18)F-FET-PET as a biomarker for therapy response in non-contrast enhancing glioma following chemotherapy. J Neuro-Oncol. 2018;139(3):721–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Hutterer M, Nowosielski M, Putzer D, Waitz D, Tinkhauser G, Kostron H, et al. O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET predicts failure of antiangiogenic treatment in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(6):856–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Schwarzenberg J, Czernin J, Cloughesy TF, Ellingson BM, Pope WB, Grogan T, et al. Treatment response evaluation using 18F-FDOPA PET in patients with recurrent malignant glioma on bevacizumab therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(13):3550–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Galldiks N, Rapp M, Stoffels G, Dunkl V, Sabel M, Langen KJ. Earlier diagnosis of progressive disease during bevacizumab treatment using O-(2-18F-fluorethyl)-L-tyrosine positron emission tomography in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Mol Imaging. 2013;12(5):273–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Galldiks N, Rapp M, Stoffels G, Fink GR, Shah NJ, Coenen HH, et al. Response assessment of bevacizumab in patients with recurrent malignant glioma using [18F]fluoroethyl-L-tyrosine PET in comparison to MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40(1):22–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Galldiks N, Dunkl V, Ceccon G, Tscherpel C, Stoffels G, Law I, et al. Early treatment response evaluation using FET PET compared to MRI in glioblastoma patients at first progression treated with bevacizumab plus lomustine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2018;45:2377.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Cavenee WK, Burger PC, Jouvet A, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol. 2007;114(2):97–109.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Floeth FW, Pauleit D, Sabel M, Stoffels G, Reifenberger G, Riemenschneider MJ, et al. Prognostic value of O-(2-18F-fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine PET and MRI in low-grade glioma. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(4):519–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Patel CB, Fazzari E, Chakhoyan A, Yao J, Raymond C, Nguyen H, et al. (18)F-FDOPA PET and MRI characteristics correlate with degree of malignancy and predict survival in treatment-naive gliomas: a cross-sectional study. J Neuro-Oncol. 2018;139(2):399–409.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, von Deimling A, Figarella-Branger D, Cavenee WK, et al. The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol. 2016;131(6):803–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. van den Bent MJ, Brandes AA, Taphoorn MJ, Kros JM, Kouwenhoven MC, Delattre JY, et al. Adjuvant procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine chemotherapy in newly diagnosed anaplastic oligodendroglioma: long-term follow-up of EORTC brain tumor group study 26951. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(3):344–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Kickingereder P, Götz M, Muschelli J, Wick A, Neuberger U, Shinohara RT, et al. Large-scale radiomic profiling of recurrent glioblastoma identifies an imaging predictor for stratifying anti-angiogenic treatment response. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22(23):5765–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Peeken JC, Nusslin F, Combs SE. “Radio-oncomics”: the potential of radiomics in radiation oncology. Strahlenther Onkol. 2017;193(10):767–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Galldiks N, Langen KJ. Amino acid PET in neuro-oncology: applications in the clinic. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2017;17(5):395–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Lohmann P, Stoffels G, Ceccon G, Rapp M, Sabel M, Filss CP, et al. Radiation injury vs. recurrent brain metastasis: combining textural feature radiomics analysis and standard parameters may increase 18F-FET PET accuracy without dynamic scans. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(7):2916–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Lohmann P, Lerche C, Bauer EK, Steger J, Stoffels G, Blau T, et al. Predicting IDH genotype in gliomas using FET PET radiomics. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):13328.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Lohmann P, Kocher M, Ceccon G, Bauer EK, Stoffels G, Viswanathan S, et al. Combined FET PET/MRI radiomics differentiates radiation injury from recurrent brain metastasis. Neuroimage Clin. 2018;20:537–42.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  97. Winkeler A, Boisgard R, Awde AR, Dubois A, Theze B, Zheng J, et al. The translocator protein ligand [18F]DPA-714 images glioma and activated microglia in vivo. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39(5):811–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Roncaroli F, Su Z, Herholz K, Gerhard A, Turkheimer FE. TSPO expression in brain tumours: is TSPO a target for brain tumour imaging? Clin Transl Imaging. 2016;4:145–56.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Su Z, Roncaroli F, Durrenberger PF, Coope DJ, Karabatsou K, Hinz R, et al. The 18-kDa mitochondrial translocator protein in human gliomas: a 11C-(R)PK11195 PET imaging and neuropathology study. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(4):512–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Unterrainer M, Fleischmann DF, Diekmann C, Vomacka L, Lindner S, Vettermann F, et al. Comparison of (18)F-GE-180 and dynamic (18)F-FET PET in high grade glioma: a double-tracer pilot study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46(3):580–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Unterrainer M, Fleischmann DF, Lindner S, Brendel M, Rupprecht R, Tonn JC, et al. Detection of cerebrospinal fluid dissemination of recurrent glioblastoma using TSPO-PET with 18F-GE-180. Clin Nucl Med. 2018;43(7):518–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Jensen P, Feng L, Law I, Svarer C, Knudsen GM, Mikkelsen JD, et al. TSPO imaging in glioblastoma multiforme: a direct comparison between 123I-CLINDE SPECT, 18F-FET PET, and gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(9):1386–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

Related to the present work, all authors report no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany

    Norbert Galldiks

  2. Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3, -4), Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany

    Norbert Galldiks, Philipp Lohmann & Karl-Josef Langen

  3. Center of Integrated Oncology (CIO), Universities of Aachen, Bonn, Cologne, and Duesseldorf, Cologne, Germany

    Norbert Galldiks

  4. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Francesco Cicone

  5. Unit of Nuclear Medicine, Sant’ Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

    Francesco Cicone

  6. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Aachen, Aachen, Germany

    Karl-Josef Langen

  7. Juelich-Aachen Research Alliance (JARA) - Section JARA-Brain, Juelich, Germany

    Karl-Josef Langen

Authors
  1. Norbert Galldiks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philipp Lohmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesco Cicone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Karl-Josef Langen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Norbert Galldiks .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Whitney B. Pope

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Galldiks, N., Lohmann, P., Cicone, F., Langen, KJ. (2020). FET and FDOPA PET Imaging in Glioma. In: Pope, W. (eds) Glioma Imaging. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27359-0_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27359-0_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27358-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27359-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation