1-[11C]-acetate PET imaging in head and neck cancer—a comparison with 18F-FDG-PET: implications for staging and radiotherapy planning

  • Aijun Sun
  • Jens Sörensen
  • Mikael Karlsson
  • Ingela Turesson
  • Bengt Langström
  • Per Nilsson
  • Lena Cederblad
  • Jan Bertling
  • Katrine Riklund
  • Silvia Johansson
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using 1-[11C]-acetate positron emission tomography (ACE-PET) to detect and delineate the gross tumour volume of head and neck cancer before radiotherapy, and to compare the results with those obtained using 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) PET.

Methods

Ten patients with histologically verified squamous cell carcinoma were investigated by FDG-PET and dynamic ACE-PET prior to radiotherapy. The two scans were performed on the same day or on consecutive days, except in one patient in whom they were done 5 days apart. Diagnostic CT or MRI was performed in all patients. The image data sets were analysed both visually and semi-quantitatively. All primary tumours and metastases were delineated automatically by using the 50% threshold of maximum radioactivity corrected for background. The mean standardised uptake value (SUV) and the tumour volumes were evaluated and compared.

Results

All ten primary tumours were detected by ACE-PET, while nine primaries were detected by FDG-PET and CT and/or MRI. The ACE SUV tended to be lower than the FDG SUV (5.3±2.7 vs 9.6±7.0, p=0.07). The tumour volumes delineated with ACE were on average 51% larger than the FDG volumes (p<0.05). ACE-PET identified 20/21 lymph node metastases, while only 13/21 lesions were detected by FDG-PET and 16/21 lesions by CT or MRI.

Conclusion

ACE-PET appears promising for the staging of head and neck cancer. The biological information provided by both FDG and ACE must be carefully validated before it can be used in clinical routine for radiation treatment planning. More studies are needed to evaluate the differences in volumes and to confirm the clinical potential of both FDG and ACE-PET, especially in radiotherapy.

Keywords

11C-acetate 18F-FDG PET Head and neck cancer SUV 

References

  1. 1.
    Panje WR, Namon AJ, Vokes E, Haraf DJ, Weichselbaum RR. Surgical management of the head and neck cancer patient following concomitant multimodality therapy. Laryngoscope 1995;105:97–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vermeersch H, Loose D, Ham H, Otte A, Van de Wiele C. Nuclear medicine imaging for the assessment of primary and recurrent head and neck carcinoma using routinely available tracers. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:1689–1700.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Greven KM. Positron-emission tomography for head and neck cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol 2004;14:121–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schwartz DL, Ford EC, Rajendran J, Yueh B, Coltrera MD, Virgin J, et al. FDG-PET/CT-guided intensity modulated head and neck radiotherapy: a pilot investigation. Head Neck 2005;27:478–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Avril NE, Weber WA. Monitoring response to treatment in patients utilizing PET. Radiol Clin North Am 2005;43:189–204.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paulino AC, Johnstone PA. FDG-PET in radiotherapy treatment planning: Pandora’s box? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;59:4–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Strauss LG, Conti PS. The applications of PET in clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 1991;32:623–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goerres GW, Von Schulthess GK, Hany TF. Positron emission tomography and PET CT of the head and neck: FDG uptake in normal anatomy, in benign lesions, and in changes resulting from treatment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:1337–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, Brown ML, Royal HD, Siegel BA, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med 2006;47:885–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Higashi K, Ueda Y, Matsunari I, Kodama Y, Ikeda R, Miura K, et al. 11C-acetate PET imaging of lung cancer: comparison with 18F-FDG PET and 99mTc-MIBI SPET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004;31:13–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ho CL, Yu SC, Yeung DW. 11C-acetate PET imaging in hepatocellular carcinoma and other liver masses. J Nucl Med 2003;44:213–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fricke E, Machtens S, Hofmann M, van den Hoff J, Bergh S, Brunkhorst T, et al. Positron emission tomography with 11C-acetate and 18F-FDG in prostate cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:607–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shreve P, Chiao PC, Humes HD, Schwaiger M, Gross MD. Carbon-11-acetate PET imaging in renal disease. J Nucl Med 1995;36:1595–601.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liu RS, Chang CP, Chu LS, Chu YK, Hsieh HJ, Chang CW, et al. PET imaging of brain astrocytoma with 1-11C-acetate. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33:420–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sandblom G, Sorensen J, Lundin N, Haggman M, Malmstrom PU. Positron emission tomography with C11-acetate for tumor detection and localization in patients with prostate-specific antigen relapse after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2006;67:996–1000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yeh SH, Liu RS, Wu LC, Yen SH, Chang CW, Chen KY. 11C-acetate clearance in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 1999;20:131–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yoshimoto M, Waki A, Yonekura Y, Sadato N, Murata T, Omata N, et al. Characterization of acetate metabolism in tumor cells in relation to cell proliferation: acetate metabolism in tumor cells. Nucl Med Biol 2001;28:117–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nestle U, Kremp S, Schaefer-Schuler A, Sebastian-Welsch C, Hellwig D, Rube C, et al. Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1342–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van Baardwijk A, Baumert BG, Bosmans G, van Kroonenburgh M, Stroobants S, Gregoire V, et al. The current status of FDG-PET in tumour volume definition in radiotherapy treatment planning. Cancer Treat Rev 2006;32:245–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Geets X, Daisne JF, Gregoire V, Hamoir M, Lonneux M. Role of 11-C-methionine positron emission tomography for the delineation of the tumor volume in pharyngo-laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma: comparison with FDG-PET and CT. Radiother Oncol 2004;71:267–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grosu AL, Piert M, Weber WA, Jeremic B, Picchio M, Schratzenstaller U, et al. Positron emission tomography for radiation treatment planning. Strahlenther Onkol 2005;181:483–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nishioka T, Shiga T, Shirato H, Tsukamoto E, Tsuchiya K, Kato T, et al. Image fusion between 18FDG-PET and MRI/CT for radiotherapy planning of oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal carcinomas. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;53:1051–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang D, Schultz CJ, Jursinic PA, Bialkowski M, Zhu XR, Brown WD, et al. Initial experience of FDG-PET/CT guided IMRT of head-and-neck carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;65:143–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nestle U, Walter K, Schmidt S, Licht N, Nieder C, Motaref B, et al. 18F-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for the planning of radiotherapy in lung cancer: high impact in patients with atelectasis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;44:593–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Black QC, Grills IS, Kestin LL, Wong CY, Wong JW, Martinez AA, et al. Defining a radiotherapy target with positron emission tomography. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;60:1272–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mah K, Caldwell CB, Ung YC, Danjoux CE, Balogh JM, Ganguli SN, et al. The impact of 18FDG-PET on target and critical organs in CT-based treatment planning of patients with poorly defined non-small-cell lung carcinoma: a prospective study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;52:339–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aijun Sun
    • 1
  • Jens Sörensen
    • 2
  • Mikael Karlsson
    • 3
  • Ingela Turesson
    • 4
  • Bengt Langström
    • 2
  • Per Nilsson
    • 5
  • Lena Cederblad
    • 4
  • Jan Bertling
    • 6
  • Katrine Riklund
    • 7
  • Silvia Johansson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiation Sciences, Section of OncologyUmeå University HospitalUmeåSweden
  2. 2.Uppsala Imanet AB PET CenterUppsalaSweden
  3. 3.Department of Radiation Sciences, Radiation PhysicsUmeå University HospitalUmeåSweden
  4. 4.Department of OncologyUppsala University HospitalUppsalaSweden
  5. 5.Department of Radiation PhysicsLund University HospitalLundSweden
  6. 6.Hermes Medical SolutionStockholmSweden
  7. 7.Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic RadiologyUmeå University HospitalUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations