Abstract
Evaluation of response after completion of treatment is complex in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) as in other lymphomas. Until recently the assessment was based on measurements of the anatomical extent of disease. This often caused problems when residual masses of uncertain significance remained after treatment. New response criteria have been developed incorporating functional imaging with 2-[18F]fluor-2-deoxyglucose (FDG-PET). Preliminary clinical data indicate that this has improved response evaluation, but more follow-up is needed. Standardized criteria for the evaluation of FDG-PET response are being developed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Barrington SF, Qian W, Somer EJ et al (2009) Concordance between four European Centres of PET reporting criteria designed for use in multicentre trials in Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36(Suppl 2):S252
Brepoels L, Stroobants S, De WW et al (2007a) Hodgkin lymphoma: response assessment by revised International Workshop Criteria. Leuk Lymphoma 48:1539–1547
Brepoels L, Stroobants S, Verhoef G (2007b) PET and PET/CT for response evaluation in lymphoma: current practice and developments. Leuk Lymphoma 48:270–282
Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B et al (1999) Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol 17:1244–1253
Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al (2007) Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:579–586
Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247
Gallamini A, Fiore F, Sorasio R et al (2009) Interim positron emission tomography scan in Hodgkin lymphoma: definitions, interpretation rules, and clinical validation. Leuk Lymphoma 50:1761–1764
Glazer GM, Gross BH, Quint LE et al (1985) Normal mediastinal lymph nodes: number and size according to American Thoracic Society mapping. AJR Am J Roentgenol 144:261–265
Hutchings M, Mikhaeel NG, Fields PA et al (2005) Prognostic value of interim FDG-PET after two or three cycles of chemotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol 16:1160–1168
Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM et al (2005) Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 23:4652–4661
Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al (2007) Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:571–578
Lister TA, Crowther D, Sutcliffe SB et al (1989) Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin’s disease: Cotswolds meeting. J Clin Oncol 7:1630–1636
Meignan M, Itti E, Bardet S et al (2009a) Development and application of a real-time on-line blinded independent central review of interim PET scans to determine treatment allocation in lymphoma trials. J Clin Oncol 27:2739–2741
Meignan M, Itti E, Gallamini A et al (2009b) Interim 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: qualitative or quantitative interpretation–where do we stand? Leuk Lymphoma 50:1753–1756
Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M et al (1981) Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 47:207–214
Picardi M, De Renzo A, Pane F et al (2007) Randomized comparison of consolidation radiation versus observation in bulky Hodgkin’s lymphoma with post-chemotherapy negative positron emission tomography scans. Leuk Lymphoma 48:1721–1727
Sargent DJ, Rubinstein L, Schwartz L et al (2009) Validation of novel imaging methodologies for use as cancer clinical trial end-points. Eur J Cancer 45:290–299
Schwartz LH, Bogaerts J, Ford R et al (2009) Evaluation of lymph nodes with RECIST 1.1. Eur J Cancer 45:261–267
Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S et al (2006) Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med 47:1059–1066
Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA et al (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205–216
Vorwerk H, Obenauer S, Schmidberger H et al (2008) The significance of a uniform definition of pathological lymph nodes in Hodgkin lymphoma: impact of different thresholds for positive lymph nodes in CT imaging on staging and therapy. Radiother Oncol 87:74–81
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Specht, L., Hutchings, M. (2011). Evaluation of Response After Radiotherapy for Hodgkin Lymphoma. In: Specht, L., Yahalom, J. (eds) Radiotherapy for Hodgkin Lymphoma. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78944-4_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78944-4_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-78455-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-78944-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)