Advertisement

PET/CT Findings in Testicular Cancer

  • Chariklia D. Giannopoulou
Chapter

Abstract

Positron emission tomography (PET), in combination with computed tomography (CT), (PET/CT) has been used in the last decade in germ cell testicular cancer, tackling conventional imaging shortcomings and diagnostic controversies, such as accurate initial staging of early-stage patients, post-chemotherapy residual mass characterization, workup of patients with rising tumor markers and negative or equivocal conventional imaging and predicting response to treatment.

References

  1. 1.
    Pfannenberg C, Aschoff P, Dittmann H et al (2010) PET/CT with 18F-FLT: does it improve the therapeutic management of metastatic germ cell tumors? J Nucl Med 51:845–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aide N, Briand M, Bohn P et al (2011) avb3 imaging can accurately distinguish between mature teratoma and necrosis in 18F-FDG-negative residual masses after treatment of non-seminomatous testicular cancer: a preclinical study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:323–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vela A, Deslandes E, Vera P et al (1999) The management of residual masses after chemotherapy in metastatic seminoma. BJU Int 83:649–653Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hilton S, Herr HW, Teitcher JB (1997) CT detection of retroperitoneal lymph node metastases in patients with clinical stage I testicular nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: assessment of size and distribution criteria. Am J Roentgenol 169:521–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Wit M, Brenner W, Hartmann M et al (2008) 18F-FDG–PET in clinical stage I/II non-seminomatous germ cell tumours: results of the German multicentre trial. Ann Oncol 19:1619–1623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lassen U, Daugaard G, Eigtved A et al (2003) Whole-body FDG-PET in patients with stage I non-seminomatous germ cell tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 30:396–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huddart RA, O’Doherty MJ, Padhani A et al (2007) 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the prediction of relapse in patients with high-risk, clinical stage I nonseminomatous germ cell tumors: preliminary report of MRC trial TE22–the NCRI testis tumour clinical study group. J Clin Oncol 25:3090–3095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cook GJ, Sohaib A, Huddart RA, Dearnaley DP et al (2015) The role of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the management of testicular cancers. Nuclear Medicine Communications 36:702–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sohaib SA, Koh D, Husband JE et al (2008) The role of imaging in the diagnosis, staging and management of testicular cancer. Am J Roentgenol 191:387–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Santis M, Becherer A, Bokemeyer C et al (2004) 2-18fluoro-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is a reliable predictor for viable tumor in postchemotherapy seminoma: an update of the prospective multicentric SEMPET trial. J Clin Oncol 22:1034–1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Becherer A, De Santis M, Karanikas G et al (2005) FDG PET is superior to CT in the prediction of viable tumour in post-chemotherapy seminoma residuals. Eur J Radiol 54:284–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hinz S, Schrader M, Kempkensteffen C et al (2008) The role of positron emission tomography in the evaluation of residual masses after chemotherapy for advanced stage seminoma. J Urol 179:936–940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Treglia G, Sadeghi R, Annunziata S et al (2014) Diagnostic performance of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the postchemotherapy management of patients with seminoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Biomed Res Int. Article ID 852681Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Decoene J, Winter C, Albers P (2015) False-positive fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography results after chemotherapy in patients with metastatic seminoma. Urol Oncol 33:23.e15–23.e21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Necchi A, Nicolai N, Alessi A et al (2016) Interim (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for early metabolic assessment of response to cisplatin, etoposide, and bleomycin chemotherapy for metastatic seminoma: clinical value and future directions. Clin Genitourin Cancer 14:249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Motzer RJ, Agarwal N, Beard C et al (2012) Testicular cancer clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw 10:502–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schmoll HJ, Jordan K, Huddart R et al (2010) Testicular seminoma: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 21(S5):140–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Warde P, Huddart R, Bolton D et al (2011) Management of localized seminoma, stage I-II: SIU/ICUD consensus meeting on germ cell tumors GCT shanghai 2009. Urology 78:S435–S443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oechsle K, Hartmann M, Brenner W et al (2008) Positron emission tomography in nonseminomatous germ cell tumors after chemotherapy: the German multicenter positron emission tomography study group. J Clin Oncol 26:5930–5935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kollmannsberger C, Oechsle K, Dohmen B et al (2002) Prospective comparison of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with conventional assessment by computed tomography scans and serum tumour markers for the evaluation of residual masses in patients with nonseminomatous germ cell carcinoma. Cancer 94:2353–2362CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nuclear Medicine Department“Evangelismos” HospitalAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations