Top

01-01-2016 | Gynecologic cancers | Book chapter | Article

7. Gynecologic Neoplasms: Cervical, Ovarian, Vulvar, Uterine, and Endometrial Cancer

Authors: Bhushan Desai, MBBS, MS, Hossein Jadvar, MD,PhD,MPH,MBA

Publisher: Springer New York

Abstract

This chapter illustrates clinical case examples demonstrating clinical utility and diagnostic performance of FDG PET-CT scans in gynecologic neoplasms which includes, cervical, ovarian, vulvar, uterine, and endometrial cancers.

Chung H, et al. Preoperative [¹⁸F] FDG PET/CT maximum standardized uptake value predicts recurrence of uterine cervical cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:1467–73.CrossRefPubMed

Kidd E, et al. Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2108–13.CrossRefPubMed

Ryu SY, et al. Detection of early recurrence with 18F FDG PET in patients with cervical cancer. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:347–52.PubMed

Nakamoto Y, et al. Clinical value of positron emission tomography with FDG for recurrent ovarian cancer. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:1449–54.CrossRef

Turlakow A, et al. Peritoneal carcinomatosis: role of 18F FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1407–12.PubMed

Risum S, et al. The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer—a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol. 2007;105:145–9.CrossRefPubMed

Burkill GJ, et al. Significance of tumor calcification in ovarian carcinoma. Br J Radiol. 2009;82:640–4.CrossRefPubMed

Risum S, et al. Standardized FDG uptake as a prognostic variable and as a predictor of incomplete cytoreduction in primary advanced ovarian cancer. Acta Oncol. 2010;50:415–9.CrossRefPubMed

Horowitz N, et al. Prospective evaluation of FDG-PET for detecting pelvic and para-aortic lymph node metastasis in uterine corpus cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2004;95:546–51.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Kazuhiro K, et al. Performance of FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent endometrial cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2008;22:103–9.CrossRef

11.

Nishiyama Y, et al. Monitoring the neoadjuvant therapy response in gynecological cancer patients using FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med. 2008;35:287–95.CrossRef

12.

Kaur H, et al. Diagnosis, staging, and surveillance of cervical carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180:1621–32.CrossRef

13.

Schwarz J, et al. The role of 18F-FDG PET in assessing therapy response in cancer of the cervix and ovaries. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:64S–73S.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Seung J, et al. CT and MR imaging of ovarian tumors with emphasis on differential diagnosis. Radiographics. 2002;22:1305–25.CrossRef

15.

Prakash P, et al. Role of PET/CT in ovarian cancer. Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:W464–70.CrossRef

16.

Lerman H, et al. Normal and abnormal 18F-FDG endometrial and ovarian uptake in pre- and postmenopausal patients: assessment by PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:266–71.PubMed

17.

Subhas N, et al. Imaging of pelvic malignancies with in-line FDG PET–CT: case examples and common pitfalls of FDG PET. Radiographics. 2005;25:1031–43.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Park J, et al. Comparison of the validity of magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the preoperative evaluation of patients with uterine corpus cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;108:486–92.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Picchio M, et al. High-grade endometrial cancer: value of [18F] FDG PET/CT in preoperative staging. Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31:506–12.PubMed

20.

Gambir SS, et al. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1S–93S.

Medicine Matters Oncology

Abstract