
pmid: 17032175
SummaryAn accurate initial staging of patients with non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is critical for the selection of an appropriate treatment. Computed tomography (CT) remains the standard imaging technique, although it is based on anatomic criteria. Positron emission tomography (PET) with 2‐deoxy‐2‐[fluorine‐18]fluoro‐d‐glucose (FDG) provides useful functional information but requires anatomical correlation to localise lesions accurately. We have prospectively compared the accuracy of combined PET/CT with that of CT and PET alone at initial staging in lymphoma patients. Forty‐seven newly diagnosed patients were evaluated. PET/CT was superior compared with CT and PET in nodal evaluation and detection of extranodal disease. Using a staging algorithm with PET/CT resulted in the disease stage being increased in 11 of 47 patients (10 NHL and 1 HL) (McNemar test P = 0·012). Therefore, a different treatment strategy based on PET/CT findings was suggested for seven patients (14·8%). PET/CT markedly improves accuracy in the diagnostic work‐up of patients with lymphoma.
Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Adolescent, Lymphoma, Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin, Middle Aged, Hodgkin Disease, Treatment Outcome, Bone Marrow, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Positron-Emission Tomography, Humans, Female, Prospective Studies, Radiopharmaceuticals, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Algorithms, Aged, Neoplasm Staging
Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Adolescent, Lymphoma, Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin, Middle Aged, Hodgkin Disease, Treatment Outcome, Bone Marrow, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Positron-Emission Tomography, Humans, Female, Prospective Studies, Radiopharmaceuticals, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Algorithms, Aged, Neoplasm Staging
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 66 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
