ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Hiroaki Nomori
Takashi Ohtsuka
Tsuguo Naruke
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nomori, H.
Right arrow Articles by Uno, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nomori, H.
Right arrow Articles by Uno, K.
Related Collections
Right arrow Lung - cancer

Ann Thorac Surg 2005;80:2020-2025
© 2005 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Original article: General thoracic

11C-Acetate Positron Emission Tomography Imaging for Lung Adenocarcinoma 1 to 3 cm in Size With Ground-Glass Opacity Images on Computed Tomography

Hiroaki Nomori, MD, PhD a , b , c , d , * , Noboru Kosaka, MD, PhD a , b , c , d , Kenichi Watanabe, MD a , b , c , d , Takashi Ohtsuka, MD a , b , c , d , Tsuguo Naruke, MD, PhD a , b , c , d , Toshiaki Kobayashi, MD, PhD a , b , c , d , Kimiichi Uno, MD, PhD a , b , c , d

a Department of Thoracic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kumamoto University
b Department of Thoracic Surgery, Saiseikai Central Hospital
c Development in Assistive Diagnostic Technology, National Cancer Center Hospital
d Nishidai Clinic, Tokyo, Japan

Accepted for publication June 3, 2005.

* Address correspondence to Dr Nomori, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Kumamoto University, 1-1-1 Honjo, Kumamoto 860-8556, Japan (Email: hnomori{at}qk9.so-net.ne.jp).


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
BACKGROUND: Positron-emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fluorodeoxy-glucose (FDG) frequently gives false-negative results for well-differentiated adenocarcinomas of the lung, especially, those with ground-glass opacity images. Recently, PET with 11C-acetate (AC) has been reported to detect slow-growing tumors that have failed to be identified by FDG-PET, such as well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas and prostate cancers. To determine the usefulness of AC-PET in detecting well-differentiated adenocarcinomas of the lung, we performed both AC-PET and FDG-PET on pulmonary nodules with ground-glass opacity images on computed tomography (CT).

METHODS: Fifty-four pulmonary nodules 1 to 3 cm in size, which showed ground-glass opacity images over their whole or peripheral area on CT, were examined by both AC-PET and FDG-PET.

RESULTS: Thirty-seven nodules were adenocarcinoma of the lung, while 17 were inflammatory. Of the 37 adenocarcinomas, 19 (51%) were positively identified by AC-PET and 14 (38%) by FDG-PET. Of the 23 adenocarcinomas which were not identified by FDG-PET, 8 (35%) were positively identified by AC-PET; all were well-differentiated adenocarcinomas. Of the 17 inflammatory nodules, 8 were chronic and 9 were acute ones. While none of the 8 chronic inflammatory nodules were identified by either technique, 9 acute ones showed a variety of the results with AC- and FDG-PET.

CONCLUSIONS: AC-PET detected approximately one third of well-differentiated adenocarcinomas of the lung which were not identified by FDG-PET. AC-PET could be useful to diagnose pulmonary nodules with ground-glass opacity images which were not identified by FDG-PET.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
Recent advances in positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fluorodeoxy-glucose (FDG) have contributed significantly to the ability to differentiate between benign and malignant pulmonary nodules. However, FDG-PET sometimes gives false-negative results, particularly for low-grade malignant tumors, such as bronchioloalveolar carcinoma and carcinoid, owing to their low glucose metabolism [1–4]. We previously reported that while FDG-PET did not produce false-negative results for squamous cell, large cell, or small cell carcinomas, 60% of well-differentiated adenocarcinomas 1 to 3 cm in size failed to be identified by FDG-PET [2]. Therefore, other PET tracers should be used for imaging suspected well-differentiated adenocarcinoma of the lung.

Radio-labeled acetate has long been used for the measuring lipid and cholesterol synthesis in biochemistry [5, 6]. Clinically, 11C-acetate (AC) has been widely used as a PET tracer for evaluating myocardial oxidative metabolism [7, 8]. Recently, AC has also been reported to be a useful PET tracer in detecting slow-growing tumors which have failed to be identified by FDG-PET, such as well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas and prostate cancers [9, 10]. Higashi and colleagues [11] have also reported a patient with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma that was positively identified by AC-PET but not by FDG-PET. In the present study, to evaluate the effectiveness of AC-PET in detecting well-differentiated adenocarcinomas of the lung, we performed both AC-PET and FDG-PET on 54 small pulmonary nodules suspected of being adenocarcinomas based on computed tomography (CT) findings.


   Material and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
Patients and Tumor Tissues
The pulmonary nodules of 1 to 3 cm in size, which were suspected of being well-differentiated adenocarcinoma of the lung owing to the presence of ground-glass opacity images over their whole or peripheral area on CT [12–15], were performed of both FDG-PET and AC-PET to evaluate the usefulness of AC-PET. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee of Saiseikai Central Hospital in December 2003. The reason why we excluded the nodules less than 1 cm was that the spatial resolution of the current generation of PET scanners is 0.7 to 0.8 cm, making it difficult to image pulmonary nodules of less than 1 cm [2]. Between January 2004 and April 2005, 54 pulmonary nodules with ground-glass opacity images in 50 patients were enrolled. Three patients have a few nodules, which were located in the different lobes of each other in each patient. During the same period, 85 pulmonary nodules up to 3 cm with solid images in 82 patients were examined only by FDG-PET. Of the 54 nodules, 37 were adenocarcinoma of the lung and 17 were inflammatory. The diagnosis was confirmed histologically after surgical resection in all 37 of the adenocarcinomas, 8 of the nodules with chronic inflammation, 2 with active tuberculosis, and 1 with active nonspecific inflammation. The remaining 6 nodules were clinically diagnosed as acute inflammatory nodules because of natural reduction on follow-up CT. The lung adenocarcinomas were classified as well-, moderately, and poorly differentiated. The percentage area showing ground-glass opacity on CT was graded as more than 90%, 30% to 90%, or less than 30%.

Positron Emission Tomography Scanning
Positron emission tomography scanning was performed at Nishidai Clinic, Tokyo, Japan. Patients were instructed to fast for at least 4 hours before PET scanning. After a written informed consent had been obtained, AC- and FDG-PET were performed on the same day within 2 weeks of CT scanning. The AC-PET was performed before FDG-PET. The dose of 11C-AC administered was 125 µCi/kg (4.6 MBq/kg). The PET imaging was performed approximately 10 minutes after the administration of 11C-AC using a PosiCam.HZL mPower scanner (Positron, Houston, Texas).

The 18F-FDG was administered approximately 30 minutes after AC-PET imaging was completed, ensuring that a gap of at least 120 minutes was left between the administration of 11C-AC and that of 18F-FDG, namely, more than 6 decay half-lives of 11C (20 minutes). The dose of 18F-FDG was 125 µCi/kg (4.6 MBq/kg) for nondiabetic patients and 150 µCi/kg (5.6 MBq/kg) for diabetic patients, as reported previously [2–4]. The FDG-PET imaging was performed approximately 45 minutes after the administration of FDG.

No attenuation-corrected emission scans were initially obtained in two-dimensional, high-sensitivity mode for 4 minutes per bed position, and taken from the vertical skull through to the mid thighs. Immediately thereafter, a two-bed–position, attenuation-corrected examination was performed, with 6 minutes for the emission sequence and 6 minutes for the transmission sequence at each bed position. The images were reconstructed by the emission scans and the preinjection transmission scans in a 128 x 128 matrix by using ordered subset expectation maximization corresponding to a pixel size of 4 x 4 mm, with section spacing of 2.56 mm.

Positron Emission Tomography Data Analysis
Images were reviewed by two observers (N.K. and K.U.) who were unaware of the patients' clinical details. A consensus was reached if there was any difference of opinion. PET images were evaluated by visual assessment, namely, lesions showing similar or greater AC or FDG uptake than the mediastinal blood pool were diagnosed as positive for tumor. The AC and FDG uptakes of the positive nodules were measured on the basis of the contrast ratio, as reported previously [2–4]. Briefly, regions of interest were chosen in the nodules and contralateral lung. The highest standard uptake value in the tumor regions of interest (T) and the contralateral normal lung regions of interest (N) were then measured and the contrast ratio was calculated as (T – N)/(T + N) in each nodule as an index of AC and FDG uptake.

Evaluation by Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve
Usefulness of detecting well-differentiated adenocarcinoma by FDG- and AC-PET was evaluated by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. The contrast ratio values of 27 well-differentiated adenocarcinomas and 27 other lesions (10 moderately or poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas and 17 inflammatory nodules) of FDG-PET and AC-PET were compared on ROC curve by using SPSS software (SPSS, Chicago, Illinois).

Statistical Analysis
Positive PET findings with malignancy and benign nodules were defined as true positive (TP) and false positive (FP), respectively. Negative PET findings with malignancy and benign nodules defined as false negative (FN) and true negative (TN), respectively. The diagnostic values of PET scanning were assessed by calculating sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivity was calculated as TP/TP + FN, specificity as TN/TN + FP, positive predictive value as TP/TP + FP, negative predictive value as TN/FN + TN, and accuracy as TP + TN/total. All data were analyzed for significance by using the two-tailed Student t test. Values of p less than 0.05 were accepted as significance. All values in the text and tables are given as mean ± SD.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 
Table 1 shows the PET findings of adenocarcinomas and inflammatory nodules. Mean sizes were 2.1 ± 0.7 cm for the 37 adenocarcinomas and 1.7 ± 0.8 cm for the 17 inflammatory nodules; this difference was not significant. Of the 37 adenocarcinomas, 19 were positively identified by AC-PET and 14 by FDG-PET. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were not significant different between the FDG-PET and AC-PET (Table 2). Eleven adenocarcinomas were positively identified by both AC- and FDG-PET, 8 were positively identified by AC-PET but not by FDG-PET, 3 were positively identified by FDG-PET but not by AC-PET, and the remaining 15 failed to be identified by either technique (Table 3). Of the 17 inflammatory nodules, 3 were positively identified by both AC-PET and FDG-PET, 2 were positively identified by AC-PET but not by FDG-PET, 2 were positively identified by FDG-PET but not by AC-PET, and the remaining 10 were negative by either technique (Table 4).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. FDG-PET and Acetate-PET Findings in Adenocarcinomas and Inflammatory Nodules
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Summary of Results of FDG-PET and Acetate-PET
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Correlation Between Histologic Grade of Differentiation of Adenocarcinomas and PET Findings
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4. FDG-PET and Acetate-PET Findings in Inflammatory Nodules
 
Table 3 also shows the correlation between the histologic grade of differentiation and the PET findings in the 37 adenocarcinomas. The histologic grades were well differentiated in 27 adenocarcinomas, moderately differentiated in 9, and poorly differentiated in 1. Of the 23 adenocarcinomas which failed to be identified by FDG-PET, 8 (36%) were positively identified by AC-PET, all of which were well-differentiated ones (Fig 1), whereas none of moderately or poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas were positive with AC-PET and negative with FDG-PET. Well-differentiated adenocarcinomas were more frequently positive with AC-PET and negative with FDG-PET than moderately or poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas (p = 0.051). Of the 15 adenocarcinomas which failed to be identified by either technique, 14 (93%) were well-differentiated ones and the remaining 1 (7%) was moderately differentiated. Well-differentiated adenocarcinomas were more frequently negative with both AC-PET and FDG-PET than moderately or poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas (p = 0.03).



View larger version (98K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig 1. (A) Computed tomography findings of well-differentiated adenocarcinoma with ground-glass opacity findings. (B) Acetate-positron emission tomography showed positive at the tumor (encircled).

 
Both AC and FDG uptake of these adenocarcinomas were usually weak by visual assessment. In the 19 adenocarcinomas detected by AC-PET, the mean values of contrast ratio and standard uptake value were 0.3 ± 0.1 (range, 0.25 to 0.42) and 2.3 ± 0.7 (range, 1.1 to 3.4), respectively. In the 13 adenocarcinomas detected by FDG-PET, the mean values of contrast ratio and standard uptake value was 0.4 ± 0.2 (range, 0.25 to 0.8) and 3.2 ± 1.8 (range, 1.0 to 7.4), respectively.

Table 4 shows the FDG- and AC-PET findings in the 17 inflammatory nodules. While none of the 8 nodules with chronic inflammation were detected by either AC- or FDG-PET, 9 nodules with acute inflammation showed a variety of the results.

Table 5 shows the correlation between the percentage area of ground-glass opacity and the histologic grade of differentiation in the 37 adenocarcinomas. Ground-glass opacity was apparent over more than 90% of the tumor area in 20 adenocarcinomas, 30% to 90% in 5, and less than 30% in the remaining 12. Well-differentiated adenocarcinomas showed more than 90% of ground-glass opacity area more frequently than moderately or poorly differentiated ones (p < 0.01).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 5. Correlation Between Percent of GGO Area and Histologic Grade of Differentiation of Adenocarcinomas
 
Figure 2 shows the ROC curves of FDG- and AC-PET for detecting 27 well-differentiated adenocarcinoma in the 54 nodules with ground-glass opacity images. The ROC curve of AC-PET was superior to that of FDG-PET. The areas under the curve were 0.573 in AC-PET and 0.318 in FDG-PET. The 95% confidential limits showed little overlap between the AC-PET (range, 0.414 to 0.733) and FDG-PET (range, 0.174 to 0.461).



View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig 2. The receiver operating characteristic curve of 11C-acetate positron emission tomography (AC-PET; solid line) and 18F-fluorodeoxy-glucose PET (FDG-PET; dotted line) for detecting 27 well-differentiated adenocarcinoma in the 54 nodules with ground-glass opacity images. The areas under the curve were 0.573 in AC-PET and 0.318 in FDG-PET. The 95% confidence limits were from 0.414 to 0.733 in AC-PET and from 0.174 to 0.461 in FDG-PET.

 
The tumor size did not show any correlation not only with contrast ratio values and standard uptake value of FDG-PET (r = 0.31 and r = 0.38, respectively) but also with contrast ratio values and standard uptake value of AC-PET (r = 0.1 and r = 0.08, respectively).


   Comment
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
Acknowledgments
 References
 
While a criterion for diagnosing pulmonary malignancy with FDG-PET has frequently used the standard uptake value with a cut-off value of 2.5 [16], it has been reported that several factors can affect the standard uptake value, such as the body size [17], blood glucose concentration [18], time after injection [19], and lesion size [20]. Actually, the mean standard uptake value of malignant pulmonary nodules has been reported to be various, ranging from 5.5 to 10.1 [21–24]. We previously compared the results of standard uptake value, contrast ratio with contralateral lung, and contrast ratio with cerebellum for diagnosing pulmonary nodules with faintly positive FDG uptake by visual estimation, and reported the cut-off value of 0.4 by the contrast ratio with contralateral lung to show the highest sensitivity, while the standard uptake value of 2.5 showing the sensitivity of 0 [25]. We therefore used the contrast ratio with contralateral lung in the present study. Both AC and FDG uptake in the present adenocarcinomas were usually weak. The mean contrast ratio values of AC and FDG uptake of the positive adenocarcinomas in the present study were 0.3 ± 0.1 and 0.4 ± 0.2, respectively, both of which were near the cut-off value for diagnosing lung cancers. It could be due to that most of adenocarcinomas in the present study were well-differentiated ones, which were known to show weak or negative PET imaging frequently [1–4].

Well-differentiated adenocarcinomas of the lung have been reported to show a high false-negative identification rate on FDG-PET because of their low glucose metabolism and low tumor cell density [1–4]. These observations were confirmed by the present study in which 22 of the 27 well-differentiated adenocarcinomas (81%) failed to be detected by FDG-PET (as shown in Table 3). While 11C-AC has been reported to be a useful PET tracer for slow-growing tumors, such as well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas and prostate cancers [9, 10], the present study showed that there was no significant difference in sensitivity between AC-PET and FDG-PET with respect to adenocarcinomas of the lung. However, of the 23 adenocarcinomas not identified by FDG-PET, 8 (35%) were positively identified by AC-PET; all of these were well-differentiated adenocarcinomas. Therefore, AC-PET was able to detect approximately one third of well-differentiated adenocarcinomas that were not detected by FDG-PET.

Ho and Yeung [9] reported that while well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinomas had a high AC uptake and a low FDG uptake, poorly differentiated ones had a low AC uptake and a high FDG uptake. Thus, hepatocellular carcinomas could be detected with 100% sensitivity by using both AC-PET and FDG-PET [9]. In contrast, Oyama and colleagues [10] reported that all 22 of their patients' prostate cancers were positively identified by AC-PET. However, the present study showed that 15 of the 37 lung adenocarcinomas (41%) could not be detected by either AC- or FDG-PET, and 14 of these 15 (93%) were well-differentiated adenocarcinomas. There are several reasons why well-differentiated adenocarcinomas of the lung may frequently go undetected by both AC-PET and FDG-PET. Firstly, well-differentiated lung adenocarcinomas may accumulate AC and FDG to only a limited extent due to lower metabolism of these substances compared with hepatocellular carcinomas and prostate cancers. Secondly, because well-differentiated adenocarcinomas frequently show ground-glass opacity images over a large area (as shown in Table 5), the density of the tumor cells is low compared with moderately or poorly differentiated ones, and that could be false-negative results of PET imaging, regardless of the degree of tracer uptake by the tumor cells. Thirdly, because all the adenocarcinomas in the present study were less than 3 cm in size, their AC or FDG uptake may have been below the limit of detection compared with larger ones.

The tracer 11C-acetate has been widely used as a PET tracer for the evaluation of myocardial oxidative mechanism [7, 8]. The mechanism underlying AC uptake in tumor cells, although as yet unknown, is thought to be different from that involved in myocardial uptake. In an in vitro study using several cancer cell lines, Yoshimoto and colleagues [25] suggested that AC is preferentially metabolized to membrane lipids in tumor cells and that AC uptake by tumor cells reflects their growth activity as measured by enhanced membrane synthesis. On the other hand, Ho and Yeung [9] reported that the AC uptake of hepatocellular carcinomas showed negative correlation with their malignant potential. In the present study, while some of the well-differentiated adenocarcinomas were positively identified by AC-PET but not by FDG-PET, some of the well-, moderately, and poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas were positively identified by both technique. Based on our present data, we hypothesize the following: (1) Whereas FDG may be accumulated by aggressive lung cancer cells [26, 27], AC might be accumulated by slow-growing ones, as in the case with hepatocellular carcinomas and prostate cancers [9, 10]. (2) Whereas most lung cancers can accumulate both AC and FDG because of containing tumor cells having different growth activity, some well-differentiated adenocarcinomas, which only contain less aggressive tumor cells, may be able to accumulate only AC.

Both chronic and acute inflammatory pulmonary nodules are well known to show ground-glass opacity images on occasions. In the present study, while all of the chronic inflammatory nodules were negative by both AC-PET and FDG-PET, the acute ones showed a variety of the results. That could be because the acute inflammatory nodules have a variety of percentages of inflammatory cells having different grades of metabolic activity, such as leukocytes, lymphocytes, and macrophages, according to the phase of inflammation.

Positron emission tomography with AC could be useful for some of pulmonary nodules with ground-glass opacity images that could not be identified by FDG-PET. In the present study, most of the nodules studied were well-differentiated adenocarcinomas because the nodules were selected on the basis of the presence of ground-glass opacity images. Therefore, AC-PET needs to be studied in other histologic types of lung cancer to clarify its usefulness in detecting lung cancers in general.


   Acknowledgments
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
References
 
This work was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid from the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Material and Methods
 Results
 Comment
 Acknowledgments
 References
 

  1. Higashi K, Ueda Y, Seki H, et al. Fluorine-18-FDG PET imaging is negative in bronchioloalveolar carcinoma J Nucl Med 1998;39:1016-1020.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Nomori H, Watanabe K, Ohtsuka T, Naruke T, Suemasu K, Uno K. Evaluation of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET scanning for pulmonary nodules less than 3 cm in diameter, with special reference to the CT images Lung Cancer 2004;45:19-27.[Medline]
  3. Nomori H, Watanabe K, Ohtsuka T, et al. Fluorine 18-tagged fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic scanning to predict lymph node metastasis, invasiveness, or both, in clinical T1N0M0 lung adenocarcinoma J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004;128:396-401.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Nomori H, Watanabe K, Ohtsuka T, Naruke T, Suemasu K, Uno K. Visual and semiquantitative analyses from F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET scanning in pulmonary nodules 1 to 3 cm in size Ann Thorac Surg 2005;79:984-988.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Howard BV. Acetate as a carbon source for lipid synthesis in cultured cells Biochim Biophys Acta 1977;488:145-151.[Medline]
  6. Long VJW. Incorporation of 1-11C-acetate into the lipids of isolated epidermal cells Br J Dermatol 1976;94:243-252.[Medline]
  7. Brown M, Marshall DR, Sobel BE, Bergmann SR. Delineation of myocardial oxygen utilization with carbon-11-labeled acetate Circulation 1987;76:687-696.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Lear JL. Relationship between myocardial clearance rates of carbon-11-acetate-deribed radiolabel and oxidative metabolismphysiologic basis and clinical significance. J Nucl Med 1991;32:1957-1960.[Free Full Text]
  9. Ho C, Yeung DW. C-11 acetate PET imaging in hepatocellular carcinoma and other liver masses J Nucl Med 2003;44:213-221.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Oyama N, Akino H, Kanamaru H, et al. 11C-acetate PET imaging of prostate cancer J Nucl Med 2002;43:181-186.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Higashi K, Ueda Y, Matsunari I, et al. 11C-acetate PET imaging of lung cancercomparison with 18F-FDG and 99mTc-MIBI SPET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:13-21.[Medline]
  12. Aoki T, Nakata H, Watanabe H, et al. Evolution of peripheral lung adenocarcinomasCT findings correlated with histology and tumor doubling time. Am J Roentgenol 2000;174:763-768.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Nakata M, Saeki H, Takata I, et al. Focal ground-glass opacity detected by low-dose helical CT Chest 2002;121:1464-1467.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Nomori H, Ohtsuka T, Naruke T, Suemasu K. Differentiating between atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and bronchioloalveolar carcinoma using the computed tomography number histogram Ann Thorac Surg 2003;76:867-871.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Nomori H, Ohtsuka T, Naruke T, Suemasu K. Histogram analysis of computed tomography numbers of clinical T1N0M0 lung adenocarcinoma, with special reference to lymph node metastasis and tumor invasiveness J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;126:1584-1589.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Langen KJ, Braun U, Rota Kops E, et al. The influence of plasma glucose levels of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in bronchial carcinomas J Nucl Med 1993;34:355-359.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Kim CK, Gupta NC, Chandramouli B, Alavi A. Standarized uptake values of FDGbody surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction. J Nucl Med 1994;35:164-167.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Lindholm P, Minn H, Leskinen-Kallio S, Bergman J, Ruotsalainen U, Joensuu H. Influence of the blood glucose concentration on FDG uptake in cancer—a PET study J Nucl Med 1993;34:1-6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Hamberg LM, Hunter GI, Alpert NM, Choi NC, Babich JW, Fischman AJ. The dose uptake ratio as an index of glucose metabolixmuseful parameter or oversimplification?. J Nucl Med 1994;35:1308-1312.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Menda Y, Bushnell DL, Madsen MT, McLaughlin K, Kahn D, Kernstine KH. Evaluation of various corrections to the standardized uptake value for diagnosis of pulmonary malignancy Nucl Med Commun 2001;22:1077-1081.[Medline]
  21. Dewan NA, Gupta NC, Redepenning LS, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of PET-FDG imaging in solitary pulmonary nodules Chest 1993;104:997-1002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Gupta NC, Maloof J, Gunel E. Probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules using fluorine-18-FDG and PET J Nucl Med 1996;37:943-948.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Imdahl A, Jenkner S, Brink I, et al. Validation of FDG positron emission tomography for differentiation of unknown pulmonary lesions Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:324-329.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Lowe VJ, Fletcher JW, Gobar L, et al. Prospective investigation of positron emission tomography in lung nodules J Clin Oncol 1998;16:1075-1084.[Abstract]
  25. Yoshimoto M, Waki A, Yonekura Y, et al. Characterization of acetate metabolism in tumor cells in relation to cell proliferationacetate metabolism in tumor cells. Nucl Med Biol 2001;28:117-122.[Medline]
  26. Higashi K, Ueda Y, Yagishita M, et al. FDG PET measurement of the proliferative potential on non-small cell lung cancer J Nucl Med 2000;41:85-92.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Vesselle H, Schmidt RA, Pugsley JM, et al. Lung cancer proliferation correlates with [F-18] fluorodeoxyglucose uptake by positron emission tomography Clin Cancer Res 2000;6:3837-3844.[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JNCI J Natl Cancer InstHome page
Y. C. Ung, D. E. Maziak, J. A. Vanderveen, C. A. Smith, K. Gulenchyn, C. Lacchetti, W. K. Evans, and Lung Cancer Disease Site Group of Cancer Care Onta
18Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in the Diagnosis and Staging of Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review
J Natl Cancer Inst, December 5, 2007; 99(23): 1753 - 1767.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
M. Kaji, H. Nomori, K. Watanabe, T. Ohtsuka, T. Naruke, K. Suemasu, and K. Uno
11C-Acetate and 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography of Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma
Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 2007; 83(1): 312 - 314.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Hiroaki Nomori
Takashi Ohtsuka
Tsuguo Naruke
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nomori, H.
Right arrow Articles by Uno, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nomori, H.
Right arrow Articles by Uno, K.
Related Collections
Right arrow Lung - cancer

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS