Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gynecologic Tumors

  • Chapter
PET in Oncology

Part of the book series: Recent Results in Cancer Research ((RECENTCANCER,volume 170))

Abstract

Five years ago, a summary of the literature estimated the average sensitivity and specificity of positron-emission tomography (PET) imaging using 2-18F-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) across all oncologic applications at 84% and 88%, respectively [1]. The average management change due to the results of FDG-PET imaging was estimated to be 30% [1]. These results make metabolic imaging with FDG-PET an alternative and sometimes complimentary tool to morphologic cross-sectional imaging procedures, such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. In the female reproductive tract, FDG-PET imaging has mainly been applied to primary diagnosis in ovarian and cervical cancer, detection of recurrence in cervical and ovarian cancer, monitoring therapy response in ovarian cancer, and evaluation of individual prognosis in ovarian and cervical cancer. Furthermore, several papers in recent years focused on the diagnostic value of the new dual-modality FDG-PET/CT in ovarian and cervical tumors.

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 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, Silverman DHS, Coleman RE, Phelps ME (2001) A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med 42 [Suppl]: l–93

    Google Scholar 

  2. Havrilesky LJ, Kulasingam SL, Matchar DB, Myers ER (2005) FDG-PET for management of cervical and ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 97:183–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Qualitätssicherung in der Onkologie (2002) Kurzgefasste Interdisziplinäre Leitlinien 2002. In: von Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft (ed) Informationszentrum für Standards in der Onkologie (ISTO). W. Zuckschwerdt, Munich

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ozols RF, Schwartz PE, Eifel PJ (1997) Ovarian cancer, fallopian tube carcinoma, and peritoneal carcinoma. In: deVita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds) Cancer: principles & practice of oncology, 5th edn. Lippincott Raven, Philadelphia, pp 1502–1539

    Google Scholar 

  5. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement (1994) Ovarian cancer: screening, treatment, and follow-up. Gynecol Oncol 55 Suppl: S4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Yankic R (1993) Cancer in older persons: magnitude of the problem-how do we apply what we know? Cancer 74:1995–1999

    Google Scholar 

  7. Schwartz PE (1981) Surgical management of ovarian cancer. Arch Surg 116:99–106

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Holschneider CH, Berek JS (2000) Ovarian cancer: epidemiology, biology, and prognostic factors. Sem Surg Oncol 19:3–10

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoskins WJ, Bundy BN, Thigpen JP, Omura GA (1992) The influence of cytoreductive surgery on recurrencefree interval and survival in small volume stage III epithelial ovarian cancer: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 47:159–166

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nelson BE, Rosenfield AT, Schwartz PE (1993) Preoperative abdominopelvic computed tomographic prediction of optimal cytoreduction in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 111:166–172

    Google Scholar 

  11. Römer W, Avril N, Dose J, Ziegler S, Kuhn W, Herz M et al (1997) Metabolie characterisation of ovarian tumors with positron emission tomography and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. Röfo 166:62–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Zimny M, Schröder W, Wolters S, Cremerius U, Rath W, Bull U (1997) 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose PET in ovarian carcinoma: methodology and preliminary results. Nuklearmedizin 36:228–233

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Fenchel S, Kotzerke J, Stöhr I, Grab D, Nussle K, Rieber A et al (1999) Preoperative assessment of asymptomatic adnexal tumors by positron emission tomography and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose. Nuklearmedizin 38:101–107

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Grab D, Flock F, Stöhr I, Nussle K, Rieber A, Fenchel S et al (2000) Classification of asymptomatic adnexal masses by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. Gynecol Oncol 77:454–459

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kubik-Huch RA, Dörffler W, von Schulthess GK, Marincek B, Kochli OR, Seifert B et al (2000) Value of (18F)-FDG positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing primary and recurrent ovarian carcinoma. Eur Radiol 10:761–767

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Reske SN, Kotzerke J (2001) FDG-PET for clinical use. Results of the 3rd German Interdisciplinary Consensus Conference “Onko-PET III“, 21 July and 19 September 2000. Eur J Nucl Med 28:1707–1723

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Rose PG, Faulhaber P, Miraldi F, Abdul-Karim FW (2001) Positron emission tomography for evaluating a complete clinical response in patients with ovarian cancer or peritoneal carcinoma: correlation with second-look laparotomy. Gynecol Oncol 82:17–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Cho SM, Ha HK, Byun JY, Lee JM, Kim CJ, Nam-Koon SE, Lee JM (2002) Usefulness of FDG PET for assessment of early recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Am J Roentgenol 179:391–395

    Google Scholar 

  19. Takekuma M, Maeda M, Ozawa T, Yasumi K, Torizuka T (2005) Positron emission tomography with Ffluoro-2-deoxyglucose for the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 10:177–181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bristow RE, del Carmen MG, Pannu HK, Cohade C, Zahurak ML, Fishman EK, Wahl RL, Montz FJ (2003) Clinically occult recurrent ovarian cancer: patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery using combined PET/CT. Gynecol Oncol 90:519–528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yoshida Y, Kurokawa T, Kawahara K, Tsuchida T, Okazawa H, Fujibayashi Y, Yonekura Y, Kotsuji F (2004) Incremental benefits of FDG positron emission tomography over CT alone for the preoperative staging of ovarian cancer. Am J Roentgenol 182:227–233

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kim S, Chung JK, Kang SB, Kim MH, Jeong JM, Lee DS, Lee MC (2004) 18F-FDG PET as a substitute for second-look laparotomy in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31:196–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nanni C, Rubello D, Farsad M, De Iaco P, Sansovini M, Erba P, Rampin L, Mariani G, Fanti S (2005) (18)F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of recurrent ovarian cancer: a prospective study on forty-one patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 31:792–797

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Pannu HK, Cohade C, Bristow RE, Fishman EK, Wahl RL (2004) PET-CT detection of abdominal recurrence of ovarian cancer: radiologic-surgical correlation. Abdom Imaging 29:398–403

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hauth EA, Antoch G, Stattaus J, Kuehl H, Veit P, Bockisch A, Kimmig R, Forsting M (2005) Evaluation of integrated whole-body PET/CT in the detection of recurrent ovarian cancer. Eur J Radiol 56:263–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bristow RE, Giuntoli RL 2nd, Pannu HK, Schulick RD, Fishman EK, Wahl RL (2005) Combined PET/CT for detecting recurrent ovarian cancer limited to retroperitoneal lymph nodes. Gynecol Oncol 99:294–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Simcock B, Neesham D, Quinn M, Drummond E, Milner A, Hicks RJ (2006) The impact of PET/CT in the management of recurrent ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 103:271–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sironi S, Messa C, Mangili G, Zangheri B, Aletti G, Garavaglia E, Vigano R, Picchio M, Taccagni G, Maschio AD, Fazio F (2004) Integrated FDG PET/CT in patients with persistent ovarian cancer: correlation with histologie findings. Radiology 233:433–440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, Naehrig J, Rutke S, Weber WA, Werner M, Graeff H, Schwaiger M, Kuhn W (2005) Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advancedstage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:7445–7453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Markman M (2005) Use of positron emission tomography scans in ovarian cancer: a diagnostic technique in search of an indication. J Clin Oncol 23:7385–7387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hempling RE (1996) Cervical cancer. In: Piver MS (ed) Handbook of gynecologic oncology, 2nd edn. Little, Brown, Boston 1, pp 103–130

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wingo PA, Tong T, Bolden S (1999) Cancer statistics 1999. CA Cancer J Clin 49:8–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Eifel PJ, Berek JS, Thighpen JT (1997) Cancer of the cervix, vagina and vulva. In: de Vita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA (eds) Cancer: Principles & Practice of Oncology, 5th edn. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 1433–1478

    Google Scholar 

  34. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (1995) FIGO staging of gynecologic cancers: cervical and vulva. Int J Gynecol Cancer 5:319–324

    Google Scholar 

  35. Beck L, Smit BJ, Roth SL (1999) Gynäkologische Tumoren. Zervixkarzinom. In: Schmitt G (ed) Onkologie systematisch. UNI-MED Verlag, Bremen, pp 121–125

    Google Scholar 

  36. Delgado G, Bundy B, Zaino R, Sevin B, Creasman WT, Major F (1990) Prospective surgical-pathological study of disease-free interval in patients with stage IB squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix: a Gynecology Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol 38:352–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kamura T, Tsukamoto N, Tsuruchi N, Saito T, Matsuyama T, Akazawa K et al (1992) Multivariate analysis of the histopathologic prognostic factors of cervical cancer in patients undergoing radical hysterectomy. Cancer 69:181–186

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Inoue T, Morita K (1990) The prognostic significance of number of positive nodes in cervical carcinoma stages IB, IIA, and IIB. Cancer 65:1923–1927

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Scheidler J, Hricak H, Yu KK, Subak L, Segal MR (1997) Radiological evaluation of lymph-node metastases in patients with cervical cancer. JAMA 278:1091–1101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Keys HM, Bundy BN, Stehman FB, Muderspach LI, Chafe WE, Suggs CL 3rd et al (1999) Cisplatin, radiation, and adjuvant hysterectomy for bulky stage IB cervical carcinoma. N Engl J Med 340:1154–1161

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Sugawara Y, Eisbruch A, Kosuda S, Recker BE, Kison PV, Wahl RL (1999) Evaluation of FDG-PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 40:1125–1131

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Rose PG, Adler LP, Rodriguez M, Faulhaber PF, Abdul Karim FW, Miraldi F (1999) Positron emission tomography for evaluating para-aortic nodal metastasis in locally advanced cervical cancer before surgical staging: a surgicopathologic study. J Clin Oncol 17:41–45

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Umesaki N, Tanaka T, Miyama M, Kawabe J, Okamura T, Koyama K et al (2000) The role of 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) in the diagnosis of recurrence and lymph node metastasis of cervical cancer. Oncol Rep 7:1261–1264

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Reinhardt MJ, Ehritt-Braun C, Vogelgesang D, Ihling C, Högerle S, Mix M, Moser E, Krause TM (2001) Metastatic lymph nodes in patients with cervical cancer: detection with MR imaging and FDG PET. Radiology 218:776–782

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F (2001) lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in patients with carcinoma of the cervix. J Clin Oncol 17:3745–3749

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kerr IG, Manji MF, Powe J, Bakheet S, Al Suhaibani H, Subhi J (2001) Positron emission tomography for the evaluation of metastases in patients with carcinoma of the cervix: a retrospective review. Gynecol Oncol 81:477–480

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Narayan K, Hicks RJ, Jobling T, Bernshaw D, McKenzie AF (2001) A comparison of MRI and PET scanning in surgically staged loco-regionally advanced cervical cancer: potential impact on treatment. Int J Gynecol Can 11:263–271

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Kühnel G, Horn LC, Fischer U, Hesse S, Seese A, Georgi P, Kluge R (2001) 18F-FDG positron-emission-tomography in cervical carcinoma: preliminary findings. Zbl Gynäkol 123:229–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Yeh LS, Hung YC, Shen YY, Kao CH, Lin CC, Lee CC (2002) Detecting para-aortic nodal metastasis by positron emission tomography of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in advanced cervical cancer with negative magnetic resonance imaging findings. Oncol Rep 9:1289–1292

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Belhocine T, Thille A, Fridman V, Albert A, Seidel L, Nickers P, Kridelka F, Rigo P (2002) Contribution of whole-body 18FDG PET imaging in the management of cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 87:90–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Lin WC, Hung YC, Yeh LS, Kao CH, Yen RF, Shen YY (2003) Usefulness of (18)F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography to detect para-aortic lymph nodal metastasis in advanced cervical cancer with negative computed tomography findings. Gynecol Oncol 89:73–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Roh JW, Seo SS, Lee S, Kang KW, Kim SK, Sim JS, Kim JY, Hong EK, Cho DS, Lee JS, Park SY (2005) Role of positron emission tomography in pretreatment lymph node staging of uterine cervical cancer: a prospective surgicopathologic correlation study. Eur J Cancer 41:2086–2092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Wright JD, Dehdashti F, Herzog TJ,Mutch DG, Huettner PC, Rader JS, Gibb RK, Powell MA, Gao F, Siegel BA, Grigsby PW (2005) Preoperative lymph node staging of early-stage cervical carcinoma by [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography. Cancer 104:2484–2491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Park W, Park YJ, Huh SJ, Kim BG, Bae DS, Lee J, Kim BH, Choi JY, Ahn YC, Lim do H (2005) The usefulness of MRI and PET imaging for the detection of parametrial involvement and lymph node metastasis in patients with cervical cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 35:260–264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Chou HH, Chang TC, Yen TC, Ng KK, Hsueh S, Ma SY, Chang CJ, Huang HJ, Chao A, Wu TI, Jung SM, Wu YC, Lin CT, Huang KG, Lai CH (2006) Low value of [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in primary staging of early-stage cervical cancer before radical hysterectomy. J Clin Oncol 24:123–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Choi HJ, Roh JW, Seo SS, Lee S, Kim JY, Kim SK, Kang KW, Lee JS, Jeong JY, Park SY (2006) Comparison of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the presurgical detection of lymph node metastases in patients with uterine cervical carcinoma: a prospective study. Cancer 106:914–922

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Park DH, Kim KH, Park SY, Lee BH, Choi CW, Chin SY (2000) Diagnosis of recurrent uterine cervical cancer: computed tomography versus positron emission tomography. Korean J Radiol 1:51–55

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Sun SS, Chen TC, Yen RF, Shen YY, Changlai SP, Kao A (2001) Value of whole body 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the evaluation of recurrent cervical cancer. Antican Res 21:2957–2961

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Nakamoto Y, Eisbruch A, Achtyes ED, Sugawara Y, Reynolds KR, Johnston CM, Wahl RL (2002) Prognostic value of positron emission tomography using F-18-fluorodeoxy-glucose in patients with cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy. Gynecol Oncol 84:289–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Havrilesky LJ, Wong TZ, Secord AA, Berchuck A, Clarke-Pearson DL, Jones EL (2003) The role of PET scanning in the detection of recurrent cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 90:186–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Ryu SY, Kim MH, Choi SC, Choi CW, Lee KH (2003) Detection of early recurrence with 18F-FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 44:347–352

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Lai CH, Huang KG, See LC, Yen TC, Tsai CS, Chang TC, Chou HH, Ng KK, Hsueh S, Hong JH (2004) Restaging of recurrent cervical carcinoma with dual-phase [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography. Cancer 100:544–552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Wong TZ, Jones EL, Coleman RE (2004) Positron emission tomography with 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]fluoro-D-glucose for evaluating local and distant disease in patients with cervical cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 6:55–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Yen TC, See LC, Chang TC, Huang KG, Ng KK, Tang SG, Chang YC, Hsueh S, Tsai CS, Hong JH, Lin CT, Chao A, Ma SY, Lin WJ, Fu YK, Fan CC, Lai CH (2004) Defining the priority of using 18F-FDG PET for recurrent cervical cancer. J Nucl Med 45:1632–1639

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Chung HH, Kim SK, Kim TH, Lee S, Kang KW, Kim JY, Park SY (2006) Clinical impact of FDG-PET imaging in post-therapy surveillance of uterine cervical cancer: from diagnosis to prognosis. Gynecol Oncol 103:165–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Grigsby PW, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Rader J, Zoberi I (2004) Posttherapy [18F] fluorodeoxy-glucose positron emission tomography in carcinoma of the cervix: response and outcome. J Clin Oncol 22:2167–2171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Olaitan A, Murdoch J, Anderson R, James J, Graham J, Barley V (2001) A critical evaluation of current protocols for the follow-up of women treated for gynecological malignancies: a pilot study. Int J Gynecol Cancer 11:349–353

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Amit A, Beck D, Lowenstein L, Lavie O, Bar Shalom R, Kedar Z, Israel O (2006) The role of hybrid PET/CT in the evaluation of patients with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 100:65–69

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Sironi S, Buda A, Picchio M, Perego P, Moreni R, Pellegrino A, Colombo M, Mangioni C, Messa C, Fazio F (2006) Lymph node metastasis in patients with clinical early-stage cervical cancer: detection with integrated FDG PET/CT. Radiology 238:272–279

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pius-Hospital Klinik für Nuklearmedizin, Georgstraße 12, 26121, Oldenburg, Germany

    M. J. Reinhardt

Authors
  1. M. J. Reinhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Nuklearmedizin, HELIOS Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Schwanebecker Chaussee 50, 13125, Berlin, Germany

    Stefan Dresel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Reinhardt, M.J. (2008). Gynecologic Tumors. In: Dresel, S. (eds) PET in Oncology. Recent Results in Cancer Research, vol 170. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31203-1_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-31203-1_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-31202-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31203-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation