title: Is there a place for FET PET in the initial evaluation of brain lesions with unknown significance?
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical value of the use of O-(2-[(18)F]fluoroethyl)-L: -tyrosine (FET) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) in patients of a neurological clinic for evaluation of brain lesions newly diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
  
  
  METHODS
  We evaluated 88 patients (44 women and 44 men) with a mean age of 50 +/- 19 years who were sent consecutively for evaluation of an intracerebral mass or lesion observed by MRI from 2006 to 2008. Hospitalization was necessary due to neurological clinical symptoms. Images were obtained by PET/CT 30 min after i.v. injection of 185 MBq FET. Coregistration with MRI was done by HERMES workstation.
  
  
  RESULTS
  FET uptake above the cortical level was observed in 60 patients. Neurosurgery was performed in 60 patients (51 with FET-positive imaging); 36 high-grade and 19 low-grade tumours were verified histologically. The sensitivity of FET PET for high-grade tumours (WHO III-IV) was 94% in this setting. Among the low-grade brain tumours (WHO I-II) 13 of 19 were FET positive, which indicates a sensitivity of 68%. Five of ten (50%) astrocytomas I and II could not be visualized by FET. Histological data were not provided for 28 of 88 patients, so the diagnostic approach is based upon longitudinal observation. Radiological and/or clinical control was done at a median of 7 months later. Three patients (all FET positive) died a few months after the examination because of rapid progression of the malignant brain tumour. A malignant entity could be excluded in the other 25 patients. Considering the whole cohort of 88 patients, 43 patients with malignant tumour could be identified, including high-grade glioma, intracerebral lymphoma (n = 1) and metastasis (n = 3). The sensitivity of FET PET for detecting a malignant tumour entity was 93%. We observed two false-positive cases with postischaemic lesions. Remarkably, the two patients with cerebral gliomatosis were false-negative on FET PET imaging. The negative predictive value for a malignant entity was calculated to be 89%.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our results indicate a high sensitivity of FET PET for detecting high-grade glioma in patients with neurological symptoms and recently observed brain lesions by MRI. In the setting of evaluating new brain lesions of unknown significance via FET PET a negative image can encourage a wait and see strategy-of course in accordance with the clinical picture and morphological imaging.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Nuclear Medicine, Wagner-Jauregg Hospital, Wagner-Jauregg Weg 15, 4021 Linz, Austria. Robert.Pichler@gespag.at
authors.forename: Robert
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Pichler
authors.forename: Andreas
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Dunzinger
authors.forename: Gabriele
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Wurm
authors.forename: Josef
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Pichler
authors.forename: Serge
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Weis
authors.forename: Karin
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Nussbaumer
authors.forename: Raffi
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Topakian
authors.forename: Reingard M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Aigner
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001932:Brain Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000473:pathology; D005260:Female; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D049268:Positron-Emission Tomography / Q000379:methods*; D011859:Radiography; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D014443:Tyrosine / Q000031:analogs & derivatives*
chemical_list: C117289:O-(2-fluoroethyl)tyrosine; D019788:Fluorodeoxyglucose F18; D014443:Tyrosine
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 1999 Aug;40(8):1367-73
references.pmid: 10450690
references.citation: Radiat Oncol. 2008 Dec 24;3:44
references.pmid: 19108742
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009 Feb;36(2):182-93
references.pmid: 18818918
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005 Sep;32(9):1018-25
references.pmid: 15877226
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2001 Mar;42(3):432-45
references.pmid: 11337520
references.citation: Nucl Med Biol. 2006 Apr;33(3):287-94
references.pmid: 16631076
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2007 Apr;48(4):519-27
references.pmid: 17401087
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005 Apr;32(4):422-9
references.pmid: 15650870
references.citation: J Neurooncol. 2007 Sep;84(3):305-14
references.pmid: 17492401
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2008 May;49(5):721-9
references.pmid: 18413402
references.citation: Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2009 Sep;151(9):1061-9
references.pmid: 19468675
references.citation: Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004 Jun;48(2):76-81
references.pmid: 15243405
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2004 Mar;45(3):374-81
references.pmid: 15001676
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2008 May;49(5):730-7
references.pmid: 18413396
references.citation: Brain. 2005 Mar;128(Pt 3):678-87
references.pmid: 15689365
references.citation: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007 Mar;28(3):455-61
references.pmid: 17353312
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2006 May;47(5):776-82
references.pmid: 16644747
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2006 Mar;47(3):393-403
references.pmid: 16513607
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002 Aug;29(8):1039-46
references.pmid: 12173018
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med. 2000 May;27(5):542-9
references.pmid: 10853810