Positron Emission Tomography for Detection and Staging of Malignant Lymphoma

  • I. Buchmann
  • F. Moog
  • H. Schirrmeister
  • S. N. Reske
Part of the Recent Results in Cancer Research book series (RECENTCANCER, volume 156)


FDG-Positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) is an imaging modality using the physiological tracer glucose [modified as 18-fluorine-2-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)], whose uptake and metabolism is increased in malignant cells. While exact tumor staging in lymphomatous diseases is the basis for choosing the appropriate treatment strategy, the detection of nodal and extranodal manifestations are a key prerequisite. This study demonstrates that FDG-PET is an efficient, non-invasive method for the staging of primary untreated Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HD) and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Clinical PET scanning is very useful in staging lymphoma patients and is more accurate than computed tomography (CT) in detecting lesions.


Positron Emission Tomography Malignant Lymphoma Positron Emission Tomography Finding Nodular Sclerosis Positive Positron Emission Tomography 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Pendlebury SC, Koutts J, Boyages J (1994) Hodgkins’ disease: clinical and radiological prognostic factors in a laparotomy series. Aust Radiol 38:123–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mauch P, Larson D, Osteen R et al (1990) Prognostic factors for positive surgical staging in patients with Hodgkins’ disease. J Clin Oncol 8:257–265PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Munker R, Stengel A, Stäbler A et al (1995) Diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and computed tomography in the staging of Hodgkins’ disease. Cancer 76:1460–1466PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leibenhaut MH, Hoppe RT, Efron B et al (1989) Prognostic indicators of laparotomy findings in clinical stage III supradiaphragmatic Hodgkins’ disease. J Clin Oncol 7:81–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Warburg O (1956) On the origin of cancer cells. Science 123:309–314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reske SN, Grillenberger KG, Glatting G, Port M, Hildebrand M, Gansauge F et al (1997) Overexpression of glucose transporter 1 and increased FDG uptake in pancreatic carcinoma. J Nud Med 38:1344–1347Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Som P, Atkins HL, Bandophadhyah D (1980) A fluorinated glucose analog, 2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-gluose (F-18). J Nud Med 21:670–675Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoh CK, Glapsy J, Rosen P, Dahlbom M, Lee SJ, Kunkel L, Hawkin RA, Maddahi J, Phelps ME (1997) Whole-body FDG-PET imaging for staging of Hodgkin’s disease and lymphoma. J Nucl Med 38(3):343–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Okada J et al (1992) Positron emission tomography using fluorin-18-fluorodeoxyglucose in malignant lymphoma: a comparison with proliferative activity. J Nucl Med 33:325–329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Okada J et al (1991) The use of FDG-PET in the detection and management of malignant lymphoma: correlation of uptake with prognosis. J Nucl Med 32:686–691PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moog F, Bangerter M, Diederichs CG, Guhlmann A, Kotzerke J, Merkle E et al (1997) Lymphoma: role of whole-body 2-deoxy-2-(F-18)-fiuoro-D-glucose (FDG) PET in nodal staging. Radiology 203:795–800PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moog F, Bangerter M, Diederichs CG, Guhlmann AC, Merkle E, Frickhofen N et al (1998) Detection of extranodal malignant lymphoma with positron emission tomography using fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET): comparison with computed tomography (CT). Radiology 206:475–481PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bangerter M, Moog F, Kocher F, Griesshammer M, Hafner M, Sandherr M et al: Role of whole bd FDG-PET imaging in predicting relapse of malignant lymphoma in patients with residual masses persisting after treatment (in press)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rosenberg SA, Berard CW, Brown BW et al (1982) National Cancer Institute sponsored study of classification of non-Hodgkins’ lymphomas: summary and description of a working formulation for clinical use. Cancer 49:2112–2135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stansfeld AG (1988) Updated Kiel classification for lymphomas. Lancet 6:292–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schmidlin P (1994) Improved iterative image reonstruction using variable projection binning and abbreviated convolution. Eur J Nucl Med 21:930–936PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kaplan HS, Anderson KC, Leonhard RC (1973) Staging laparotomy and splenectomy in Hodgkins’ disease: analysis of indications and patterns of involvment in 285 consecutive, unselected patients. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 36:291–298PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fishman EK, Kuhlman JE, Jones RJ (1991) CT of lymphoma: spectrum of disease. Radiographics 11:667–669Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Castellino RA (1992) Diagnostic imaging studies in patients with newly diagnosed Hodgkins’ disease. Ann Oncol 3(4):4–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mansfield CM, Fabian C, Jones S et al (1990) Comparison of lymphangiography and computed tomography scanning in evaluation abdominal disease in stages III and IV Hodgkins’ disease. Cancer 66:2295–2299PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shirkhoda A, Ros PR, Farah J et al (1990) Lymphoma of the solid abdominal viscera. Radiol Clin North Am 28:785–799PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Skovsgaard T, Brinckmeyer M, Vesterager L et al (1982) The liver in Hodgkins’ disease: II. Histopathologic findings. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 18:429–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Castellino RA (1982) Imaging techniques for staging abdominal Hodgkins’ disease. Cancer Treat Rep 66:697–700PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ahmann DL, Kiely JM, Harrison EG et al (1966) Malignant lymphoma of the spleen: a review of 49 cases in which the diagnosis was made at splenectomy. Cancer 19:461–469PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wegener OH (1992) Mediastinum. In: Ganzkörpercomputertomographie, 2nd edn. Blackwell, Berlin, pp 141–143Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dorfman RE, Alpern MB, Gross BH, Sandier MA (1991) Upper abdominal lymph node size determined with CT. Radiology 180:319–322PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Einstein DM, Singer AA, Chilcote WA, Desai RK (1991) Abdominal lymphadenopathy: spectrum of CT findings. Radiographics 11:457–472PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Castellino R, Hoppe R, Blank N et al (1984) Computed tomography, lymphography, and staging laparotomy: correlation in initial staging of Hodgkins’ disease. AJR 143:37–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kaplan HS (1980) Hodgkins’ disease, 2nd edn. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jabour BA, Choi Y, Hoh C et a1(1993) Extracranial head and neck: PET imaging with 2-(F-18)fluoro-2-deoxy-glucose and MR imaging correlation. Radiology 186:27–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Eichhorn T, Schroeder HG, Glanz H et al (1987) Histologisch kontrollierter Vergleich von Palpation und Sonographie bei der Diagnose von Halslymphknotenmetastasen. Laryngol Rhinol Otol 66:266–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Front D, Bar-Shalom R, Epelbaum R et al (1993) Early detection of lymphoma recurrence with gallium-67 scintigraphy. J Nucl Med 34:2101–2104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Front D, Israel O, Epelbaum R et al (1990) Ga-67 SPECT before and after treatment of lymphoma. Radiology 175:515–519PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Larcos G, Farlow DC, Antico VF et al (1994) The role of high-dose 67-gallium scintigraphy in staging untreated patients with lymphoma. Aust N ZJ Med 24:5–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Anderson KC, Leonhard RCG, Canellos GP (1983) High-dose gallium imaging in lymphoma. Am J Med 75:327–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hahn PF, Weissleder S, Stark DD et al (1988) MR imaging of focal splenic tumors. AJR 150:823–827PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stollfuss J, Glatting G, Fries H, Kocher F, Beger H, Reske SN (1995) 2-(fluorine-18 fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET in detection of pancreatic cancer: value of quantitative image interpretation. Radiology 195:339-34Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hoffmann JM, Waskin HA, Hanson MW et al (1993) FDG-PET in differentiating lymphoma from nonmalignant central nervous system lesions in patients with AIDS. J Nucl Med 34:567–575Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • I. Buchmann
    • 1
  • F. Moog
    • 1
  • H. Schirrmeister
    • 1
  • S. N. Reske
    • 1
  1. 1.Abteilung für Nuklearmedizin der Universitätsklinik UlmOberer Eselsberg, UlmGermany

Personalised recommendations