Standardized FDG uptake as a prognostic variable and as a predictor of incomplete cytoreduction in primary advanced ovarian cancer

References

• Lucignani G, Paganelli G, Bombardieri E. The use of standardized uptake values for assessing FDG uptake with PET in oncology: A clinical perspective. Nucl Med Commun 2004;25:651–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kidd EA, Siegel BA, Dehdashti F, Grigsby PW. The standardized uptake value for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose is a sensitive predictive biomarker for cervical cancer treatment response and survival. Cancer 2007;110:1738–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allal AS, Dulguerov P, Allaoua M, Haenggeli CA, El-Ghazi eA, Lehmann W, . Standardized uptake value of 2-[(18)F] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in predicting outcome in head and neck carcinomas treated by radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:1398–404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downey RJ, Akhurst T, Gonen M, Vincent A, Bains MS, Larson S, . Preoperative F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography maximal standardized uptake value predicts survival after lung cancer resection. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:3255–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS. Maximum standardized uptake values on positron emission tomography of esophageal cancer predicts stage, tumor biology, and survival. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;82:391–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sperti C, Pasquali C, Chierichetti F, Ferronato A, Decet G, Pedrazzoli S. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in predicting survival of patients with pancreatic carcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 2003;7:953–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oshida M, Uno K, Suzuki M, Nagashima T, Hashimoto H, Yagata H, . Predicting the prognoses of breast carcinoma patients with positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-fluoro[18F]-D-glucose. Cancer 1998;82:2227–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tingulstad S, Hagen B, Skjeldestad FE, Halvorsen T, Nustad K, Onsrud M. The risk-of-malignancy index to evaluate potential ovarian cancers in local hospitals. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:448–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubner KF, McDonald TW, Niethammer JG, Smith GT, Gould HR, Buonocore E. Assessment of primary and metastatic ovarian cancer by positron emission tomography (PET) using 2-[18F]deoxyglucose (2-[18F]FDG). Gynecol Oncol 1993;51:197–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox D. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc B 1972;34:187–202.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplan E, Meier P. Non-parametric estimation for incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1958;53:457–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avril N. GLUT1 expression in tissue and (18)F-FDG uptake. J Nucl Med 2004;45:930–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffiths CT. Surgical resection of tumor bulk in the primary treatment of ovarian carcinoma. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1975;42:101–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hoskins WJ, McGuire WP, Brady MF, Homesley HD, Creasman WT, Berman M, . The effect of diameter of largest residual disease on survival after primary cytoreductive surgery in patients with suboptimal residual epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994;170:974–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aletti GD, Dowdy SC, Podratz KC, Cliby WA. Analysis of factors impacting operability in stage IV ovarian cancer: Rationale use of a triage system. Gynecol Oncol 2007;105: 84–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chi DS, Venkatraman ES, Masson V, Hoskins WJ. The ability of preoperative serum CA-125 to predict optimal primary tumor cytoreduction in stage III epithelial ovarian carcinoma. Gynecol Oncol 2000;77:227–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Jong D, Eijkemans MJ, Lie FS, Gerestein CG, Kooi GS, Baalbergen A, . Preoperative predictors for residual tumor after surgery in patients with ovarian carcinoma. Oncology 2007;72:293–301.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Risum S, Hogdall C, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Hogdall E, Nedergaard L, . Prediction of suboptimal primary cytoreduction in primary ovarian cancer with combined positron emission tomography/computed tomography—a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2008;108:265–70.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Axtell AE, Lee MH, Bristow RE, Dowdy SC, Cliby WA, Raman S, . Multi-institutional reciprocal validation study of computed tomography predictors of suboptimal primary cytoreduction in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:384–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kumar R, Alavi A. PET imaging in gynecologic malignancies. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:1155–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Risum S, Hogdall C, Loft A, Berthelsen AK, Hogdall E, Nedergaard L, . The diagnostic value of PET/CT for primary ovarian cancer—a prospective study. Gynecol Oncol 2007;105:145–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avril N, Sassen S, Schmalfeldt B, Naehrig J, Rutke S, Weber WA, . Prediction of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy by sequential F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7445–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz JK, Grigsby PW, Dehdashti F, Delbeke D. The role of 18F-FDG PET in assessing therapy response in cancer of the cervix and ovaries. J Nucl Med 2009;50:64–73.
   Google Scholar
• Bristow RE, del Carmen MG, Pannu HK, Cohade C, Zahurak ML, Fishman EK, . Clinically occult recurrent ovarian cancer: Patient selection for secondary cytoreductive surgery using combined PET/CT. Gynecol Oncol 2003; 90:519–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Risum S, Hogdall C, Markova E, Berthelsen AK, Loft A, Jensen F, . Influence of 2-(18F) fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography on recurrent ovarian cancer diagnosis and on selection of patients for secondary cytoreductive surgery. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2009;19:600–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar