Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lymphome

  • Chapter
PET/CT-Atlas

  • 3866 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Lymphome werden unterschieden in Hodgin- und Non-Hodgkin-Lymphome und sind durch eine unspezifische Symptomatik charakterisiert. Neben dem International Prognostic Score (IPS) und bildgebenden radiologischen Verfahren sowie eventueller Liquorpunktion nimmt die Bedeutung der FDG-PET/CT beim primären Staging von Hodgkin-Lymphomen und den Non-Hodgkin-Lymphomen des follikulären Typs und des diffus-großzelligen B-Zell-Lymphoms stetig zu – besonders auch im Hinblick auf die weitere Anwendung von Chemotherapie und Strahlentherapie. Sie gilt inzwischen als sicherste Methode zur Detektion von Lymphommanifestationen und ist zum internationalen Standard avanciert. Der Fokus der klinischen Forschung liegt auf dem Einsatz von FDG-PET/CT zur Beurteilung von Therapieregimen, nicht zuletzt mit der Absicht einer Reduktion von Chemotherapien und dem Erreichen einer verbesserten Lebensqualität.

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 299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and 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

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  1. Academy of Molecular Imaging (2005) Molecular Imaging and Biology. Springer, Heidelberg, S 79–180

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ansell SM, Armitage JO (2012) Positron emission tomographic scans in lymphoma: convention and controversy. Mayo Clin Proc 87(6): 571–580. doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.03.006

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Bangerter M, Kotzerke J, Grieshammer M et al. (1999) Positron emission tomography with 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in the staging and follow-up of lymphoma in the chest. Acta Oncol 38: 799–804

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baum RP, Niesen A, Hertel A, Adams S, Kojouharoff B, Goldenberg DM, Hor G (1994) Initial clinical results with technetium-99mlabeled LL2 monoclonal antibody fragment in the radioimmunodetection of B-cell lymphomas. Cancer 73: 896–899

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bundesarztekammer (2015) Stellungnahme der Bundesarztekammer gem. § 91 Abs. 5 SGB V uber eine Anderung der Richtlinie Methoden vertragsarztliche Versorgung—PET/PET-CT bei malignen Lymphomen bei der Behandlung von Kindern und Jugendlichen. http://www.bundesaerztekammer.de/page.asp? his = 0.7.5598.11578

  6. Cremerius U, Fabry U, Wildberger JE et al. (2002) Pre-transplant positron emission tomography (PET) using fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) predicts outcome in patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 30: 103–111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Nuklearmedizin (2004) Empfehlungen der Strahlenschutzkommission. Anwendung der Positronenemissionstomographie [PET] als effizientes dosissparendes Diagnoseverfahren. Nuklearmedizin PET 3: N35–N36

    Google Scholar 

  8. Diffuses groszelliges B-Zell-Lymphom. Onkopedia. https://www.dgho-onkopedia.de/de/onkopedia/leitlinien/diffuses-grosszelliges-b-zell-lymphom

  9. Dryver ET, Jernstrom H, Tompkins K, Buckstein R, Imrie KR (2003) Follow-up of patients with Hodgkin’s disease following curative treatment: the routine CT scan is of little value. Br J Cancer 89(3): 482–486. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6601052

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Eichenauer DA, Engert A, Dreyling M, ESMO Guidelines Working Group (2011) Hodgkin’s lymphoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol 22 (suppl 6): vi55–vi58. doi:10.1093/annonc/ mdr378

    Google Scholar 

  11. El-Galaly TC, d’ Amore F, Mylam KJ et al. (2012) Routine bone marrow biopsy has little or no therapeutic consequence for positron emission tomography/computed tomography-staged treatment-naive patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 30(36): 4508–4514. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.4036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. El-Galaly TC, Hutchings M (2015) Imaging of non-hodgkin lymphomas: diagnosis and response-adapted strategies. Cancer Treat Res 165: 125–146. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-13150-4_5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G et al. (2003) Utility of FDG PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood 101: 3875–3876

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fox KA, Lippman SM, Cassady JR et al. (1987) Radiation therapy salvage of Hodkin’s disease following chemotherapy failure. J Clin Oncol 5: 38–45

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Freudenberg LS, Antoch G, Schutt P et al. (2004) FDG-PET/CT in re-staging of patients with lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31: 325–329

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gallamini A, Hutchings M, Rigacci L et al. (2007) Early interim 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to international prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 25(24): 3746–3752. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.11.6525

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J et al. (2001) A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med 42 (suppl): 1S– 93 S

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hadi M, Chen CC, Whatley M et al. (2007) Brown fat imaging with 18F-6-fluorodopamine PET/CT, 18F-FDG PET/CT, and 123I-MIBG SPECT: a study of patients being evaluated for pheochromcytoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 48: 1077–1083

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hahn K, Pfluger T (2004) Has PET become an important clinical tool in paediatric imaging? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31: 615–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Health NIO (2006) Imaging response criteria. http://imaging.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/imaging

  21. Hodgkin-Lymphome. Onkopedia. https://www.onkopedia.com/de/my-onkopedia/guidelines/hodgkin-lymphom

  22. Hussien AEM, Furth C, Schonberger S et al. (2015) FDG-PET Response Prediction in Pediatric Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: Impact of Metabolically Defined Tumor Volumes and Individualized SUV Measurements on the Positive Predictive Value. Cancers 7(1): 287–304. doi:10.3390/cancers7010287

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Indolente Non Hodgkin-Lymphome (NHL). Onkopedia. https://www.onkopedia.com/de/onkopedia/guidelines/indolente-nonhodgkin-lymphome-nhl

  24. Isasi CR, Lu P, Blaufox MD (2005) A metaanalysis of 18F-2-deoxy- 2-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the staging and restaging of patients with lymphoma. Cancer 104(5): 1066–1074. doi:10.1002/cncr.21253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E (2005) Cancer Statistics 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 55: 10–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al. (2007) Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol 25(5): 571–578. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.2305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Juweid ME, Wiseman G, Mendal Y et al. (2004) Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography-based response classification for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (Abstr. 66). Mol Imaging Biol 6: 86

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kapucu LO, Akyuz C, Vural G, Oguz A, Atasever T et al. (1997) Evaluation of therapy response in children with untreated malignant lymphomas using technetium-99 m-sestamibi. J Nucl Med 38: 243–247

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kassenpatienten auch zukunftig ohne PET-Untersuchung? PI_ IQWiG081112.pdf. http://www.nuklearmedizin.de/leistungen/ PI_iqwig081112.php?navId = 15

  30. Kasamon YL, Jones RJ, Wahl RL (2007) Integrating PET and PET/CT into the risk-adapted therapy of lymphoma. J Nucl Med 48 (suppl 1): 19S–27 S

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kluge R, Kurch L, Montravers F, Mauz-Korholz C (2013) FDG PET/CT in children and adolescents with lymphoma. Pediatr Radiol 43(4): 406–417. doi: 10.1007/s00247-012-2559-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Korholz D, Kluge R, Wickmann L et al. (2003) Importance of F18- fluorodeoxy-D-2 glucose positron emission tomography (FDGPET) for staging and therapy control of Hodgkin’s lymphoma in childhood and adolescence—consequences for the GPOH-HD 2003 protocol. Onkologie 26: 489–493

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kobe C, Dietlein M, Franklin J et al. (2008) Positron emission tomography has a high negative predictive value for progression or early relapse for patients with residual disease after first-line chemotherapy in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood 112(10): 3989–3994. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-06-155820

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Kostakoglu L, Cheson BD (2014) Current role of FDG PET/CT in lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41(5): 1004–1027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kostakoglu L, Schoder H, Johnson JL et al. (2012) Interim (18)F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in stage I-II non-bulky Hodgkin lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma 53(11): 2143–2150. doi:10.3109/10428194.2012.676173

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Krause A, Kluge R, Mauz-Koerholz C et al. (2004) Initial staging of Hodgkin’s disease (HD) in children by 18F-FDG PET vs. CT/MRI/US (Abstr. 350). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31 (suppl 2): 285–286

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kwee TC, Kwee RM, Nievelstein RAJ (2008) Imaging in staging of malignant lymphoma: a systematic review. Blood 111(2): 504–516. doi:10.1182/blood-2007-07-101899

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Leskinen-Kallo S, Ruotsalainen U, Nagren K, Teras M, Joensuu H (1991) Uptake of carbon-11-methionine and fluorodeoxyglucose in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a PET study. J Nucl Med 32: 1211–1218

    Google Scholar 

  39. Martiat Ph, Ferrant A, Labar D et al. (1988) In vivo measurement of carbon-11 thymidine uptake in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma using positron emission tomography. J Nucl Med 29: 1633–1637

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. McDonnell PJ, Becker LC, Bulkley BH et al. (1981) Thallium imaging in cardiac lymphoma. Am Heart J 101: 809–914

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Meyer RM, Hoppe RT (2012) Point/counterpoint: early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma and the role of radiation therapy. Blood 120(23): 4488–4495

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Deutsche Krankenhausgesellschaft (2013) Pressemitteilung. DKG zum Beschluss des G-BA zur PET bei malignen Lymphomen. http://www.dkgev.de/media/file/13665.2013-04-18_PM-DKGzum- GBA-Beschluss-PET-Lymphomen.pdf. Zugegriffen: 22.08.2015

  43. Mijnhout GS, Hoekstra OS, van Lingen A et al. (2003) How morphometric analysis of metastatic loads predicts the (un) usefulness of PET scanning: the case of lymphnode staging in melanoma. J Clin Pathol 56: 283–286

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Naumann R, Beuthien-Baumann B, Reiss A et al. (2004) Substantial impact of FDG PET imaging on the therapy decision in patients with early-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Br J Cancer 90: 620–625

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Okada J, Yoshikawa K, Imazeki K et al. (1991) The use of FDG-PET in the detection and management of malignant lymphoma: correlation of uptake with prognosis. J Nucl Med 32: 686–691

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Paul R (1987) Comparison of fluorine-18-2-fluorodeoxyglucose and gallium-67 citrate imaging for detection of lymphoma. J Nucl Med 28: 288–292

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Reske S, 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  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Robert Koch-Institut und die Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e.V. (2013) Krebs in Deutschland 2009/2010, 9. Ausgabe, Berlin, S 116–119. http://www.rki.de/Krebs/DE/Content/Publikationen/Krebs_in_Deutschland/kid_2013/krebs_in_deutschland_2013.pdf;jsessionid = 2514 C313ED283CA929A0F6C08E9FB30F.2_cid381?__blob = – publicationFile. (Zugriff: 27.02.2015)

  49. Ruhlmann J, Oehr P, Biersack HJ (1998) PET in der Onkologie. Springer, Berlin, S 145–152

    Book  Google Scholar 

  50. Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C et al. (2004) Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging. Radiology 232(3): 823–829. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2323030985

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Schoder H, Noy A, Gonen M et al. (2005) Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 23: 4643–4651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P et al. (2001) Prognostic value of positron emission tomography (PET) with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose ([18F]FDG) after first-line chemotherapy in non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma: is [18F]FDG-PET a valid alternative to conventional diagnostic methods? J Clin Oncol 19: 414–419

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P et al. (2002) Early restaging positron emission tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose predicts outcome in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol 13: 1356–1363

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Spaepen K, Dupont S. Stroobants P et al. (2003) Prognostic value of pretransplantaton positron emission tomography using fluorine- 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with aggressive lymphoma treated with high dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation. Blood 102: 53–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Sun SS, Kao CH (2001) Negative results of 18F-FDG and 67Gacitrate scintigraphy in gastric MALT lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med Sci 14: 183–186

    Google Scholar 

  56. Tartar M, Kipper MS (2004) Positron emission tomography scan findings of autoimmun lymphoproliferative syndrome. Mol Imaging Biol 6: 124–125

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Tatsumi M, Kitayama H, Sugahara H et al. (2001) Whole-body hybrid PET with 18F-FDG in the staging of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Nucl Med 42: 601–608

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Voelker T, Denecke T, Amthauer H et al. (2004) The use of FDG-PET for primary staging in paediatric Hodgkin’s lymphoma: comparison with conventional imaging modalities (Abstr. 275). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31 (suppl 2): S270

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wirth A, Seymour JF, Hicks RJ et al. (2002) Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, gallium-67 scintigraphy, and conventional staging for Hodgkin’s disease and non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Am J Med 112: 262–268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Wong CO, Thie J, Parling-Lynch KJ et al. (2007) Investigating the existence of quantum metabolic values in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography. Mol Imaging Biol 9: 43–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Yamane T, Daimaru O, Ito S et al. (2004) Decreased 18F-FDG uptake 1 day after initiation of chemotherapy for malignant lymphomas. J Nucl Med 45: 1838–1842

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Young CS, Young BL, Smith SM (1998) Staging Hodgkin disease with 18-FDG-PET comparison with CT and surgery. Clin Pos Imaging:161–164

    Google Scholar 

  63. Zijlstra JM, Comans EF, van Lingen A et al. (2007) FDG PET in lymphoma: the need for standardization of interpretation. An observer variation study. Nucl Med Commun 28(10): 798–803. doi:10.1097/MNM.0b013e3282eff2d5 @@

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Diagnostisch Therapeutisches Zentrum, Kadiner Straße 23, 10243, Berlin

    Prof. Dr. med. Wolfgang Mohnike

  2. Kuckucksweg 25, 61462, Königstein/Taunus

    Prof. Dr. med. Gustav Hör

  3. Klinik für Diagnostische und Therapeutische, Nuklearmedizin, Klinikum Fulda gAG, Pacelliallee 4, 36043, Fulda

    Dr. med. Andreas Hertel

Authors
  1. Prof. Dr. med. Wolfgang Mohnike
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prof. Dr. med. Gustav Hör
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dr. med. Andreas Hertel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Diagnostisch Therapeutisches Zentrum, Berlin, Deutschland

    Wolfgang Mohnike

  2. Königstein, Deutschland

    Gustav Hör

  3. Klinikum für Nuklearmedizin, Klinikum Fulda, Fulda, Deutschland

    Andreas Hertel

  4. UCLA Molecular & Medical Pharmacology, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Heinrich Schelbert

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mohnike, W., Hör, G., Hertel, A. (2016). Lymphome. In: Mohnike, W., Hör, G., Hertel, A., Schelbert, H. (eds) PET/CT-Atlas. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48842-3_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48842-3_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-48841-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-48842-3

  • eBook Packages: Medicine (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation