Advertisement

Brain Tumors

  • Franklin C. L. Wong
  • Xiaoyi Duan
  • E. Edmund Kim
Chapter

Abstract

In 2009, about 61,414 new cases of primary brain tumors were expected to be diagnosed in the US, including 22,738 malignant brain tumors and 38,677 nonmalignant brain tumors. (CBTRUS (2009). CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2004–2005. Source: central brain tumor registry of the United States, Hinsdale. Website: www.cbtrus.org.) Brain tumors are the most common solid tumors in children (Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapcho M, Mariotto A, Miller BA, Feuer EJ, Clegg L, Horner MJ, Holader N, Eisner MP, Reichman M, Edwards BK, editors. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2004, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/, based on November 2006 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, 2007.) and the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in children under the age of 20 Years. (Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. American Cancer Society. Published online May 2009.) In 2009, approximately 4,000 children younger than age 20 years were diagnosed with primary brain tumors, 2,875 of which were younger than 15 years. (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program (www.seer.cancer.gov) SEER*Stat Database: Incidence – SEER 17 Regs Limited‐Use + Hurricane Katrina Impacted Louisiana Cases, Nov 2008 Sub (2000–2006) <Katrina/Rita Population Adjustment> − Linked To County Attributes – Total U.S., 1969–2006 Counties, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released April 2009, based on the November 2008 submission. Analyzed by CBTRUS July 13, 2009.)

Keywords

Brain Tumor Standardize Uptake Value Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma Primary Brain Tumor Radiation Necrosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    CBTRUS (2009). CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2004–2005. Source: central brain tumor registry of the United States, Hinsdale. Website: www.cbtrus.org.
  2. 2.
    Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapcho M, Mariotto A, Miller BA, Feuer EJ, Clegg L, Horner MJ, Holader N, Eisner MP, Reichman M, Edwards BK, editors. SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2004, National Cancer Institute. Bethesda, http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/, based on November 2006 SEER data submission, posted to the SEER web site, 2007.
  3. 3.
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. American Cancer Society. Published online May 2009.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program (www.seer.cancer.gov) SEER*Stat Database: Incidence – SEER 17 Regs Limited-Use + Hurricane Katrina Impacted Louisiana Cases, Nov 2008 Sub (2000–2006) <Katrina/Rita Population Adjustment> − Linked To County Attributes – Total U.S., 1969–2006 Counties, National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released April 2009, based on the November 2008 submission. Analyzed by CBTRUS July 13, 2009.
  5. 5.
    Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol. 2007;114:97–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Norden AD, Wen PY, Kesari S. Brain metastases. Curr Opin Neurol. 2005;18:654–61.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nathoo N, Toms SA, Barnett GH. Metastases to the brain: current management perspectives. Expert Rev Neurother. 2004;4(4):633–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alger JR, Frank JA, Bizzi A. Metabolism of human gliomas: assessment with H-1 MR spectroscopy and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET. Radiology. 1990;177:633–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ricci PE. Imaging of adult brain tumors. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 1999;9:651–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim KT, Black KL, Marciano D, et al. Thallium-201 SPECT imaging of brain tumors: methods and results. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:965–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Datta NR, Pasricha R, Gambhir S, et al. Postoperative residual tumor imaged by contrast-enhanced CT and Tl-201 SPECT: can they predict progression-free survival in high grade glioma? Clin Oncol. 2004;16:494–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Tuama LA, Packard AB, Treves ST. SPECT imaging of pediatric brain tumor with hexakis (methoxyisobutylisonitrile) technetium (I). J Nucl Med. 1990;31:2040–1.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ito M, Lammertsma AA, Wise RSJ, et al. Measurement of regional cerebral blood flow and oxygen utilization in patients with cerebral tumors: analytical techniques and preliminary results. Neuroradiology. 1982;23:63–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yamamoto YL, Thompson CJ, Meyer E, et al. Dynamic positron emission tomography for study of cerebral hemodynamics in a cross section of the head using positron-emitting 67Ga-EDTA and 77Kr. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1977;1:43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baba T, Fukiu M, Takeshita I, et al. Selective enhancement of intratumoral blood flow in malignant gliomas using intra-arterial adenosine triphosphate. J Neurosurg. 1990;72(6):907–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Di Chiro G, De La Paz PL, Brooks RA, et al. Glucose utilization of cerebral gliomas measured by F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose and PET. Neurology. 1982;32:1323–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spence AM, Muzi M, Graham MM, et al. Glucose metabolism in human malignant gliomas measured quantitatively with PET, 1-[C-11]glucose and FDG: analysis of the FDG lumped constant. J Nucl Med. 1998;39(3):440–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Warburg O, Wind F, Negelein E. The metabolism of tumor in the body. J Gen Physiol. 1927;8:519–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blacklock JB, Oldfield EH, Di Chiro G, et al. Effect of barbiturate coma on glucose utilization in normal brain versus gliomas. Positron emission tomography studies. J Neurosurg. 1987;67:71–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Inoue T, Kim EE, Wong FC, et al. Comparison of fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose and carbon-11-methionine PET in detection of malignant tumors. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:1472–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Conti PS, Hilton J, Wong DF, et al. High performance liquid chromatography of carbon-11-labeled compounds. J Nucl Med. 1994;21(8):1045–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heinisch M, Dirisamer A, Loidl W, et al. Positron emission tomography/ computed tomography with F-18-fluorocholine for restaging of prostate cancer patients: meaningful at PSA  <  5 ng/ml? Mol Imaging Biol. 2006;8:43–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jacobs AH, Thomas A, Kracht LW, Li H, Dittmar C, Garlip G, et al. 18F-fluoro-L-thymidine and 11C-methylmethionine as markers of increased transport and proliferation in brain tumors. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1948–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen W, Cloughesy T, Kamdar N, et al. Imaging proliferation in brain tumors with 18F-FLT PET: comparison with 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(6):945–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Backes H, Ullrich R, Neumaier B, et al. Noninvasive quantification of (18)F-FLT human brain PET for the assessment of tumour proliferation in patients with high-grade glioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2009;12:1960–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Becherer A, Karanikas G, Szabo M, et al. Brain tumour imaging with PET: a comparison between [18F]fluorodopa and [11C]methionine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2003;30:1561–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chen W, Silverman DH, Delaloye S, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET imaging of brain tumors: comparison study with 18F-FDG PET and evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:904–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tripathi M, Sharma R, D’Souza M, et al. Comparative evaluation of F-18 FDOPA, F-18 FDG, and F-18 FLT-PET/CT for metabolic imaging of low gradr gliomas. Clin Nucl Med. 2009;34(12):878–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ledezma CJ, Chen W, Sai V, et al. 18F-FDOPA PET/MRI fusion in patients with primary/recurrent gliomas: initial experience. Eur J Radiol. 2009;71:242–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Choi SJ, Kim JS, Kim JH, et al. [18F]3′-deoxy-3′-fluorothymidine PET for the diagnosis and grading of brain tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2005;32(6):653–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Inoue T, Koyama K, Oriuchi N, et al. Detection of malignant tumors: whole-body PET with fluorine 18 alpha-methyl tyrosine versus FDG – preliminary study. Radiology. 2001;220:54–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cher LM, Murone C, Lawrentschuk N, et al. Correlation of hypoxic cell fraction and angiogenesis with glucose metabolic rate in gliomas using 18F-fluoromisonidazole, 18F-FDG PET, and immunohistochemical studies. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:410–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ullrich RT, Kracht L, Brunn A, et al. Methyl-L-11C-methionine PET as a diagnostic marker for malignant progression in patients with glioma. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1962–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Blasberg RG, Roelcke U, Weinreich R, et al. Imaging brain tumor proliferative activity with [124I]iododeoxyuridine. Cancer Res. 2000;60:624–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Henze M, Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss A, Milker-Zabel S, et al. Characterization of 68 Ga-DOTA-D-Phe1-Tyr3-octreotide kinetics in patients with meningiomas. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:763–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tsukamoto E, Ochi S. PET/CT today: system and its impact on cancer diagnosis. Ann Nucl Med. 2006;20:255–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Meyer PT, Schreckenberger M, Spetzger U, et al. Comparison of visual and ROI-based brain tumor grading using 18F-FDG PET: ROC analyses. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:165–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hustinx R, Smith RJ, Benard F, et al. Can the standardized uptake value characterize primary brain tumors on FDGPET? Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:1501–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pirotte B, Goldman S, Salzberg S, et al. Combined positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for the planning of stereotactic brain biopsies in children: experience in 9 cases. Pediatr Neurosurg. 2003;38:146–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Alavi JB, Alavi A, Chawluk J, et al. Positron emission tomography in patients with glioma. A predictor of prognosis. Cancer. 1988;62:1074–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Holzer T, Herholz K, Jeske J, et al. FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in radiochemotherapy of glioblastoma. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993;17:681–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    De Witte F, Lefranc F, Levivier M, et al. FDG-PET as a prognostic factor in high-grade astrocytoma. J Neurol Oncol. 2000;49:157–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Malkin MG. Interstitial irradiation of malignant gliomas. Rev Neurol. 1992;148:448–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kobayashi T, Tanaka T, Kida Y. The early effects of gamma knife on 40 cases of acoustic neurinoma. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 1994;62:93–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mogard J, Kihlström L, Ericson K. Recurrent tumor vs radiation effects after gamma knife radiosurgery of intracerebral metastases: diagnosis with PET-FDG. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1994;18:177–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Glantz MJ, Hoffman JM, Coleman RE, et al. Identification of early recurrence of primary central nervous system tumors by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Ann Neurol. 1991;29:347–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wang SX, Boethius J, Ericson K. FDG-PET on irradiated brain tumor: ten years’ summary. Acta Radiol. 2006;47:85–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Spence AM, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, et al. 18F-FDG PET of gliomas at delayed intervals: improved ­distinction between tumor and normal gray matter. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1653–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Teh BS, Paulino AC, Lu HH, et al. Versatility of the Novalis system to deliver image-guided stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for various anatomical sites. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2007;6(4):347–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Solberg TD, Agazaryan N, Goss BW, et al. A feasibility study of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography targeting and simultaneous integrated boost for intensity-modulated radiosurgery and radiotherapy. J Neurosurg. 2004;101(Suppl 3):381–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Tralins KS, Douglas JG, Stelzer KJ, et al. Volumetric analysis of 18F-FDG PET in glioblastoma multiforme: prognostic information and possible role in definition of target volumes in radiation dose escalation. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1667–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hwang AB, Bacharach SL, Yom SS, et al. Can positron emission tomography (PET) or PET/computed tomography (CT) acquired in a nontreatment position be accurately registered to a head-and-neck radiotherapy planning CT? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73:578–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ciernik IF, Dizendorf E, Baumert BG, et al. Radiation treatment planning with an integrated positron emission and computer tomography (PET/CT): a feasibility study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;57:853–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wieder HA, Brucher BL, Zimmermann F, et al. Time course of tumor metabolic activity during chemoradiotherapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and response to treatment. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:900–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Chen W, Delaloye S, Silverman DHS, et al. Predicting treatment response of malignant gliomas to bevacizumab and irinotecan by imaging proliferation with [18F] fluorothymidine positron emission tomography: a pilot study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4714–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Fadul C, Misulis KE, Wiley RG. Cerebellar metastases: diagnostic and management considerations. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:1107–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Weisberg LA. Solitary cerebellar metastases: clinical and CT correlations. Arch Neurol. 1985;42:336–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rohren E, Provenzale J, Barboriak D, et al. Screening for cerebral metastases with FDG-PET in patients undergoing whole-body staging of non-central ­nervous system malignancy. Radiology. 2003;226(1):181–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Jeon H-J, Chung J-K, Kim Y-K, et al. Usefulness of whole-body F-18 FDG PET in patients with suspected metastatic brain tumors. J Nucl Med. 2003;43(11):1432–7.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Nakagawa K, Aoyagi M, Inaji M, et al. The usefulness of whole body FDG-PET/CT in patients with brain metastasis. No Shinkei Geka. 2009;37:159–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Murray K, Kun L, Cox J. Primary malignant ­lymphoma of the central nervous system. Results of ­treatment of 11 cases and review of the literature. J Neurosurg. 1986;65:600–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Miller DC, Hochberg FH, Harris NL, et al. Pathology with clinical correlations of primary central nervous system non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The Massachusetts General Hospital experience 1958–1989. Cancer. 1994;74:1383–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lee JW, Kang KW, Park SH, et al. 18F-FDG PET in the assessment of tumor grade and prediction of tumor recurrence in intracranial meningioma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag. 2009;36:1574–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Benz MR, Czernin J, Dry SM, et al. Quantitative F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET accurately characterizes peripheral nerve sheath tumors as malignant or benign. Cancer. 2010;116:451–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Franklin C. L. Wong
    • 1
  • Xiaoyi Duan
    • 2
  • E. Edmund Kim
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Departments of Nuclear Medicine and NeurooncologyThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Nuclear Medicine, First Affiliated HospitalXìan Jiaotong University, College of MedicineShaanxiChina
  3. 3.Departments of Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic RadiologyThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and Medical SchoolHoustonUSA
  4. 4.Graduate School of Convergence Science and TechnologySeoul National UniversitySeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations