Are There New Molecular Imaging Modalities Behind the Corner?

  • Lucia Leccisotti
  • Antonella Stefanelli


The diagnostic work-up of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has also changed thanks to recent advances in positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and its increasing availability. Several studies showed that FDG PET-CT accurately changed the stage with a subsequent alteration in therapy in almost one-third of patients. Moreover, FDG PET-CT capable to predict the effect of preoperative chemoradiation as well as survival.


  1. 1.
    Davey K, Heriot A, Mackay J, Drummond E, Hogg A, Ngan S, Milner A, Hicks R (2008) The impact of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography on the staging and management of primary rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 51(7):997–1003CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deleau C, Buechera B, Rousseauc C, Kraeber-Bode F, Flamanta M, des Varannesa SB, Frampasb E, Galmichea J-P, Matysiak-Budnika T (2011) Clinical impact of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scan/computed tomography in comparison with computed tomography on the detection of colorectal cancer recurrence. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23:275–281CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coenegrachts K, De Geeter F, ter Beek L, Walgraeve N, Bipat S, Stoker J, Rigauts H (2009) Comparison of MRI (including SS SE-EPI and SPIO-enhanced MRI) and FDG-PET/CT for the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Eur Radiol 19(2):370–379CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kong G, Jackson C, Koh D, Lewington V, Sharma B, Brown G, Cunningham D, Cook G (2008) The use of 18F-FDG PET/CT in colorectal liver metastases-comparison with CT and liver MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35(7):1323–1329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leccisotti L, Gambacorta MA, de Waure C, Stefanelli A, Barbaro B, Vecchio FM, Coco C, Persiani R, Crucitti A, Tortorelli AP, Giordano A, Valentini V (2015) The predictive value of 18F-FDG PET/CT for assessing pathological response and survival in locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42(5):657–666CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ryan JE, Warrier SK, Lynch AC, Heriot AG (2015) Assessing pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis 17:849–861CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maffione AM, Marzola MC, Capirci C, Colletti PM, Rubello D (2015) Value of (18)F-FDG PET for predicting response to neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 204(6):1261–1268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joye I, Deroose CM, Vandecaveye V, Haustermans K (2014) The role of diffusion-weighted MRI and (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the prediction of pathologic complete response after radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer: a systematic review. Radiother Oncol 113(2):158–165CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maffione AM, Chondrogiannis S, Capirci C, Galeotti F, Fornasiero A, Crepaldi G, Grassetto G, Rampin L, Marzola MC, Rubello D (2014) Early prediction of response by 18F-FDG PET/CT during preoperative therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol 40(10):1186–1194CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Memon S, Lynch AC, Akhurst T, Ngan SY, Warrier SK, Michael M, Heriot AG (2014) Systematic review of FDG-PET prediction of complete pathological response and survival in rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 21(11):3598–3607CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Stiphout RG, Valentini V, Buijsen J, Lammering G, Meldolesi E, van Soest J, Leccisotti L, Giordano A, Gambacorta MA, Dekker A, Lambin P (2014) Nomogram predicting response after chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer using sequential PETCT imaging: a multicentric prospective study with external validation. Radiother Oncol 113(2):215–222CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paspulati RM, Partovi S, Herrmann KA, Krishnamurthi S, Delaney CP, Nguyen NC (2015) Comparison of hybrid FDG PET/MRI compared with PET/CT in colorectal cancer staging and restaging: a pilot study. Abdom Imaging 40(6):1415–1425CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Roels S, Slagmolen P, Nuyts J et al (2008) Biological image guided radiotherapy in rectal cancer: is there a role for FMISO or FLT, next to FDG? Acta Oncol 47:1237–1248CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dietz D, Dehdashti F, Grigsby P, Malyapa R, Myerson R, Picus J, Ritter J, Lewis J, Welch M, Siegel B (2008) Tumor hypoxia detected by positron emission tomography with 60Cu-ATSM as a predictor of response and survival in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal carcinoma: a pilot study. Dis Colon Rectum 51(11):1641–1648CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Francis DL, Freeman A, Visvikis D et al (2003) In vivo imaging of cellular proliferation in colorectal cancer using positron emission tomography. Gut 52:1602–1606CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Muijs CT, Beukema JC, Widder J, van den Bergh ACM, Havenga K, Pruim J, Langendijk JA (2011) 18F-FLT-PET for detection of rectal cancer. Radiother Oncol 98(3):357–359CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wieder H, Geinitz H, Rosenberg R, Lordick F, Becker K, Stahl A, Rummeny E, Siewert J, Schwaiger M, Stollfuss J (2007) PET imaging with [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine for prediction of response to neoadjuvant treatment in patients with rectal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 34(6):878–883CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yang SY, Sales KM, Fuller B, Seifalian AM, Winslet MC (2009) Apoptosis and colorectal cancer: implications for therapy. Trends Mol Med 15:225–233CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.PET-CT CentreFondazione Pol. Universitario A. GemelliRomeItaly
  2. 2.Institute of Nuclear MedicineUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuoreRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations