Jennifer Holter-Chakrabarty, Lacey McNally, John Levine, James Ferrara, Sara K Vesely, Christopher G Kanakry, Tabitha Garwe, Zheng Han, Manu Pandey, Joshua Glover, Yuejin Wen, Ron Gress, Kirsten M Williams
Christian Roest, Thomas C Kwee, Igle J de Jong, Ivo G Schoots, Pim van Leeuwen, Stijn W T P J Heijmink, Henk G van der Poel, Stefan J Fransen, Anindo Saha, Henkjan Huisman, Derya Yakar
Aritrick Chatterjee, Ambereen N Yousuf, Roger Engelmann, Carla Harmath, Grace Lee, Milica Medved, Ernest B Jamison, Abel Lorente Campos, Batuhan Gundogdu, Glenn Gerber, Luke F Reynolds, Parth K Modi, Tatjana Antic, Mihai Giurcanu, Scott Eggener, Gregory S Karczmar, Aytekin Oto
Linjie Bian, Junyan Xu, Panli Li, Liyan Bai, Shaoli Song
{"title":"Comparison of <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT for Detection of Recurrent or Metastatic Paragangliomas.","authors":"Linjie Bian, Junyan Xu, Panli Li, Liyan Bai, Shaoli Song","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240059","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240059","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic performance of gallium 68 (<sup>68</sup>Ga)-DOTA-NaI3-octreotide (<sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC) and fluorine 18 (<sup>18</sup>F)-fluoro-l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (<sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA) PET/CT in detecting recurrent or metastatic paragangliomas. Materials and Methods This single-center retrospective study included patients with paragangliomas who underwent both <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT between August 2021 and December 2023. The diagnostic performance of these two tracers in detecting recurrent or metastatic tumors was compared using several metrics, including sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy. Results This study included 36 patients (median age, 52 years [range, 14-78 years]; 16 female, 20 male). Of these, nine underwent initial <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT examinations before treatment, and the remaining 27 underwent posttreatment examinations. Twenty-two of those 27 patients had recurrence or metastasis. According to lesion-level analysis, <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC had higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for diagnosis of bone metastases than did <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT (97% vs 78% [<i>P</i> < .001], 85% vs 42% [<i>P</i> = .02], and 97% vs 81% [<i>P</i> < .001], respectively). <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT had higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for the diagnosis of liver metastases than did <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT (73% vs 15% [<i>P</i> < .001], 68% vs 41% [<i>P</i> = .04], and 83% vs 46% [<i>P</i> < .001], respectively). According to patient-level analysis, the sensitivity of <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT for diagnosing liver metastases was higher than that of <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT (88% vs 25%; <i>P</i> = .04). Conclusion In patients with recurrent or metastatic paragangliomas, <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT showed better performance than <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT in detecting bone metastases, and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT performed better in detecting liver metastases. <b>Keywords:</b> <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC, <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA, Pheochromocytoma, Paraganglioma Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 1","pages":"e240059"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791669/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142786861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Association of Clinical and US Features with Malignancy of Breast Tumors: Investigating Shear-Wave Elastography and Radiomics.","authors":"Brandon K K Fields, Bonnie N Joe","doi":"10.1148/rycan.249028","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.249028","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 1","pages":"e249028"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791662/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142865323","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Measurable Disease in Glioblastoma using PET-based Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (PET RANO 1.0).","authors":"Netanja I Harlianto","doi":"10.1148/rycan.259001","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.259001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 1","pages":"e259001"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791658/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143034064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Joshua D Shur, Nuria Porta, Leila Kafaei, Laura Pendower, James McCall, Nasir Khan, Wim Oyen, Dow-Mu Koh, Edward Johnston
{"title":"Evaluation of Local Tumor Outcomes Following Microwave Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases Using CT Imaging: A Comparison of Visual versus Quantitative Methods.","authors":"Joshua D Shur, Nuria Porta, Leila Kafaei, Laura Pendower, James McCall, Nasir Khan, Wim Oyen, Dow-Mu Koh, Edward Johnston","doi":"10.1148/rycan.230147","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.230147","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To compare visual versus quantitative ablation confirmation for identifying local tumor progression and residual tumor following microwave ablation (MWA) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Materials and Methods This retrospective study included patients undergoing MWA of CRLM from October 2014 to February 2018. Two independent readers visually assessed pre- and postprocedure images and semiquantitatively scored for incomplete ablation, using a six-point Likert scale, and extracted quantitative imaging metrics of minimal ablative margin (MAM) and percentage of tumor outside of the ablation zone, using both rigid and deformable registration. Diagnostic accuracy and intra- and interobserver agreement were assessed. Results The study included 60 patients (median age, 71 years [IQR, 60-74.5 years]; 38 male) with 97 tumors with a median diameter of 1.3 cm (IQR, 1.0-1.8 cm). Median follow-up time was 749 days (IQR, 330-1519 days). Median time to complete rigid and deformable workflows was 3.0 minutes (IQR, 3.0-3.2 minutes) and 14.0 minutes (IQR,13.9-14.4 minutes), respectively. MAM with deformable registration had the highest intra- and interobserver agreement, with Gwet AC1 of 0.92 and 0.67, respectively, significantly higher than interobserver agreement of visual assessment (Gwet AC1, 0.18; <i>P</i> < .0001). Overall, quantitative methods using MAM had generally higher sensitivity, of up to 95.6%, than visual methods (67.3%, <i>P</i> < .001), at a cost of lower specificity (40% vs 71.1%, <i>P</i> < .001), using deformable image registration. Conclusion Quantitative ablation margin metrics provide more reliable assessment of outcomes than visual comparison using pre- and postprocedure diagnostic images following MWA of CRLM. <b>Keywords:</b> Interventional-Body, Liver, Neoplasms, Ablation Techniques <i>Supplemental material is available for this article</i>. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 1","pages":"e230147"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791670/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143034063","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}