18-Fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computerised tomography (FDG PET/CT) is commonly used in the management of patients with lymphomas and is recommended for both initial staging and response assessment after treatment in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma. Despite the FDG avidity of follicular lymphoma (FL), FDG PET/CT is not yet applied in standard clinical practice for patients with FL. However, FDG PET/CT is more accurate than conventional imaging for initial staging, often prompting significant management change, and allows noninvasive characterization to guide assessment of high-grade transformation. For restaging, FDG PET/CT assists in distinguishing between scar tissue and viable tumors in residual masses and a positive PET after induction treatment would seem to predict a shorter progression-free survival. 1. Introduction Follicular lymphoma (FL) is one of the most common types of lymphoma, representing around 25% of adult non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs) worldwide [1]. FL evolution is highly variable with differences in clinical presentation, histological appearance, clinical behaviour, and response to therapy. Indeed, while some FL patients achieve prolonged complete remission (CR) other experience iterative relapses with or without histological transformation into a high-grade lymphoma (25–60%) [2, 3]. Treatment options, including watchful waiting, external radiotherapy, chemotherapy, monoclonal antibodies, radioimmunotherapy (RAIT), and biologic therapies, are guided by clinical features, the extent of disease at presentation and prognostic indices such as the FL international prognostic index (FLIPI) [4–6]. In order to segregate between patients with an indolent FL from those with more aggressive disease, risk stratification and identifying factors predictive of survival are of major interest in this disease. 18-Fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET/CT) is a noninvasive whole-body tri-dimensional imaging technique. FDG PET/CT is commonly used in the management of patients with lymphomas especially for initial staging and response assessment at the end of treatment in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Despite the now well recognized FDG avidity of FL, the use of FDG PET/CT is not recommended in standard practice [7–9]. Herein, we review using recent publications, the interest of FDG PET/CT in FL and the potential of new PET tracers such as radio-labeled monoclonal antibodies (MAbs). 2. FDG PET for Initial Staging In order to stage the
References
[1]
S. Petrasch, H. Stein, M. H. Kosco, and G. Brittinger, “Follicular dendritic cells in non-Hodgkin lymphomas: localisation, characterisation and pathophysiological aspects,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1052–1056, 1991.
[2]
S. J. Horning and S. A. Rosenberg, “The natural history of initially untreated low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphomas,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 311, no. 23, pp. 1471–1475, 1984.
[3]
P. J. Bierman, “Natural history of follicular grade 3 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,” Current Opinion in Oncology, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 433–437, 2007.
[4]
M. Dreyling, “Newly diagnosed and relapsed follicular lymphoma: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. v181–v183, 2010.
[5]
P. Solal-Céligny, P. Roy, P. Colombat et al., “Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index,” Blood, vol. 104, no. 5, supplement, pp. 1258–1265, 2004.
[6]
M. Federico, M. Bellei, L. Marcheselli et al., “Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index 2: a new prognostic index for follicular lymphoma developed by the international follicular lymphoma prognostic factor project,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 27, no. 27, pp. 4555–4562, 2009.
[7]
M. E. Juweid, S. Stroobants, O. S. Hoekstra et al., “Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the imaging subcommittee of international harmonization project in lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 571–578, 2007.
[8]
B. D. Cheson, B. Pfistner, M. E. Juweid et al., “Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 579–586, 2007.
[9]
M. Weiler-Sagie, O. Bushelev, R. Epelbaum et al., “18F-FDG avidity in lymphoma readdressed: a study of 766 patients,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 25–30, 2010.
[10]
NCCN, “Practice guidelines in oncology v.1.2010: non-Hodgkin’s Lymphomas,” 2010.
[11]
E. E. Pakos, A. D. Fotopoulos, and J. P. A. Ioannidis, “18F-FDG PET for evaluation of bone marrow infiltration in staging of lymphoma: a meta-analysis,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 958–963, 2005.
[12]
R. H. Blum, J. F. Seymour, A. Wirth, M. MacManus, and R. J. Hicks, “Frequent impact of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on the staging and management of patients with indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,” Clinical Lymphoma, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 43–49, 2003.
[13]
A. Janikova, K. Bolcak, T. Pavlik, J. Mayer, and Z. Kral, “Value of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of follicular lymphoma: the end of a dilemma?” Clinical Lymphoma and Myeloma, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 287–293, 2008.
[14]
S. W？hrer, U. Jaeger, K. Kletter et al., “18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) visualizes follicular lymphoma irrespective of grading,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 780–784, 2006.
[15]
G. Jerusalem, Y. Beguin, F. Najjar et al., “Positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) for the staging of low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL),” Annals of Oncology, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 825–830, 2001.
[16]
M. Karam, L. Novak, J. Cyriac, A. Ali, T. Nazeer, and F. Nugent, “Role of fluorine-18 fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with low-grade lymphomas,” Cancer, vol. 107, no. 1, pp. 175–183, 2006.
[17]
A. M. Scott, D. H. Gunawardana, J. Wong et al., “Positron emission tomography changes management, improves prognostic stratification and is superior to gallium scintigraphy in patients with low-grade lymphoma: results of a multicentre prospective study,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 347–353, 2009.
[18]
A. Wirth, M. Foo, J. F. Seymour, M. P. MacManus, and R. J. Hicks, “Impact of [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography on staging and management of early-stage follicular Non-Hodgkin lymphoma,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 213–219, 2008.
[19]
S. Bishu, J. M. Quigley, S. R. Bishu et al., “Predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of F-18-fluoro-deoxy-glucose positron emission tomography treated grade 1 and 2 follicular lymphoma,” Leukemia and Lymphoma, vol. 48, no. 8, pp. 1548–1555, 2007.
[20]
L. Le Dortz, S. De Guibert, S. Bayat et al., “Diagnostic and prognostic impact of 18F-FDG PET/CT in follicular lymphoma,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 2307–2314, 2010.
[21]
E. Giné, S. Montoto, F. Bosch et al., “The Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) and the histological subtype are the most important factors to predict histological transformation in follicular lymphoma,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 1539–1545, 2006.
[22]
A. R. Yuen, O. W. Kamel, J. Halpern, and S. J. Horning, “Long-term survival after histologic transformation of low-grade follicular lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1726–1733, 1995.
[23]
H. Sch？der, A. Noy, M. G？nen et al., “Intensity of 18fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 23, no. 21, pp. 4643–4651, 2005.
[24]
C. Bodet-Milin, F. Kraeber-Bodéré, P. Moreau, L. Campion, B. Dupas, and S. Le Gouill, “Investigation of FDG-PET/CT imaging to guide biopsies in the detection of histological transformation of indolent lymphoma,” Haematologica, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 471–472, 2008.
[25]
B. Tang, J. Malysz, V. Douglas-Nikitin et al., “Correlating metabolic activity with cellular proliferation in follicular lymphomas,” Molecular Imaging and Biology, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 296–302, 2009.
[26]
A. Noy, H. Sch？der, M. G？nen et al., “The majority of transformed lymphomas have high standardized uptake values (SUVs) on positron emission tomography (PET) scanning similar to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL),” Annals of Oncology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 508–512, 2009.
[27]
R. L. Wahl, H. Jacene, Y. Kasamon, and M. A. Lodge, “From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 50, no. 1, supplement, pp. 122S–150S, 2009.
[28]
P. Cheebsumon, M. Yaqub, F. H. P. Van Velden, O. S. Hoekstra, A. A. Lammertsma, and R. Boellaard, “Impact of [18F]FDG PET imaging parameters on automatic tumour delineation: need for improved tumour delineation methodology,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 2136–2144, 2011.
[29]
T. Terasawa, T. Nihashi, T. Hotta, and H. Nagai, “18F-FDG PET for posttherapy assessment of Hodgkin's disease and aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a systematic review,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 13–21, 2008.
[30]
J. M. Zijlstra, G. Lindauer-Van Der Werf, O. S. Hoekstra, L. Hooft, I. I. Riphagen, and P. C. Huijgens, “18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography for post-treatment evaluation of malignant lymphoma: a systematic review,” Haematologica, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 522–529, 2006.
[31]
M. E. Juweid, G. A. Wiseman, J. M. Vose et al., “Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 23, no. 21, pp. 4652–4661, 2005.
[32]
E. Lopci, L. Zanoni, A. Chiti et al., “FDG PET/CT predictive role in follicular lymphoma,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 864–871, 2012.
[33]
J. Trotman, M. Fournier, T. Lamy et al., “Positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) after induction therapy is highly predictive of patient outcome in follicular lymphoma: analysis of PET-CT in a subset of PRIMA trial participants,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 29, no. 23, pp. 3194–3200, 2011.
[34]
E. Lopci, I. Santi, E. Derenzini et al., “FDG-PET in the assessment of patients with follicular lymphoma treated by ibritumomab tiuxetan Y 90: multicentric study,” Annals of Oncology, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1877–1883, 2010.
[35]
C. Bodet-Milin, F. Kraeber-Bodéré, B. Dupas et al., “Evaluation of response to fractionated radioimmunotherapy with 90Y-epratuzumab in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma by 18F- fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography,” Haematologica, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 390–397, 2008.
[36]
T. Terasawa, J. Lau, S. Bardet et al., “Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for interim response assessment of advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a systematic review,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 1906–1914, 2009.
[37]
E. Itti, C. Lin, J. Dupuis et al., “Prognostic value of interim 18F-FDG PETin patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment at 4 cycles of chemotherapy,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 527–533, 2009.
[38]
S. J. Horning, M. E. Juweid, H. Sch？der et al., “Interim positron emission tomography scans in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: an independent expert nuclear medicine evaluation of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group E3404 study,” Blood, vol. 115, no. 4, pp. 775–777, 2010.
[39]
P. L. Zinzani, L. Gandolfi, A. Broccoli et al., “Midtreatment 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma,” Cancer, vol. 117, no. 5, pp. 1010–1018, 2011.
[40]
R. O. Casasnovas, M. Meignan, A. Berriolo-Riedinger et al., “SUVmax reduction improves early prognosis value of interim positron emission tomography scans in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma,” Blood, vol. 118, no. 1, pp. 37–43, 2011.
[41]
V. Safar, J. Dupuis, E. Itti et al., “Interim [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy plus rituximab,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 184–190, 2012.
[42]
P. L. Zinzani, L. Rigacci, V. Stefoni et al., “Early interim 18F-FDG PET in Hodgkin's lymphoma: evaluation on 304 patients,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 4–12, 2012.
[43]
J. Markova, D. Kahraman, C. Kobe et al., “Role of [18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography in early and late therapy assessment of patients with advanced Hodgkin lymphoma treated with bleomycin, etoposide, adriamycin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone,” Leukemia and Lymphoma, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 64–70, 2012.
[44]
A. Gallamini, C. Patti, S. Viviani et al., “Early chemotherapy intensification with BEACOPP in advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma patients with a interim-PET positive after two ABVD courses,” British Journal of Haematology, vol. 152, no. 5, pp. 551–560, 2011.
[45]
J. J. Cerci, L. F. Pracchia, C. C. G. Linardi et al., “18F-FDG PET after 2 cycles of ABVD predicts event-free survival in early and advanced Hodgkin lymphoma,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 51, no. 9, pp. 1337–1343, 2010.
[46]
L. R. Perk, O. J. Visser, M. Stigter-Van Walsum et al., “Preparation and evaluation of 89Zr-Zevalin for monitoring of 90Y-Zevalin biodistribution with positron emission tomography,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 33, no. 11, pp. 1337–1345, 2006.
[47]
G. A. Van Dongen, A. J. Poot, and D. J. Vugts, “PET imaging with radiolabeled antibodies and tyrosine kinase inhibitors: immuno-PET and TKI-PET,” Tumor Biology, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 607–615, 2012.
[48]
S. N. F. Rizvi, O. J. Visser, M. J. W. D. Vosjan et al., “Biodistribution, radiation dosimetry and scouting of 90Y- ibritumomab tiuxetan therapy in patients with relapsed B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma using 89Zr-ibritumomab tiuxetan and PET,” European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 512–520, 2012.
[49]
C. R. Divgi, N. Pandit-Taskar, A. A. Jungbluth et al., “Preoperative characterisation of clear-cell renal carcinoma using iodine-124-labelled antibody chimeric G250 (124I-cG250) and PET in patients with renal masses: a phase I trial,” Lancet Oncology, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 304–310, 2007.
[50]
P. K. E. B？rjesson, Y. W. S. Jauw, R. Boellaard et al., “Performance of immuno—positron emission tomography with zirconium-89-labeled chimeric monoclonal antibody U36 in the detection of lymph node metastases in head and neck cancer patients,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 12, no. 7 I, pp. 2133–2140, 2006.
[51]
E. C. F. Dijkers, J. G. W. Kosterink, A. P. Rademaker et al., “Development and characterization of clinical-grade89Zr- trastuzumab for HER2/neu immunoPET imaging,” Journal of Nuclear Medicine, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 974–981, 2009.
