Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lymphoma: Differential Diagnosis of Mediastinal Masses and Response

  • Chapter
Diseases of the Heart and Chest, Including Breast 2011–2014

  • 879 Accesses

Abstract

Recommendations for the clinical use of [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography ([18F]-FDG PET/CT) imaging have become available [1] and the imaging technique has been incorporated into the management algorithms recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Center Network (NCCN) [2]. Procedures and practice guidelines have been published by the Society of Nuclear Medicine (SNM) and the American College of Radiology (ACR) [3–5]. Recommendations in National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical trials are also available [6]. For patients with lymphoma, consensus recommendations for assessing response have been published by the imaging subcommittee of the International Harmonization Project, including criteria for interpretation [7]. Response criteria for lymphoma have been revised based on PET/CT imaging, eliminating the “complete remission unconfirmed (CRu)” category [8].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Podoloff DA, Advani RH, Allred C et al (2007) NCCN Task Force Report: positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) scanning in cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 5(Suppl 1):S1–S22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP et al (2008) Recommendations for the Use of FDG (fluorine-18, (2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose) positron emission tomography in Oncology. J Nucl Med 49:480–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Coleman RE, Delbeke D, Guiberteau MJ et al (2005) Intersociety dialogue on concurrent PET-CT with an integrated imaging system: From the Joint ACR/SNM/SCBT-MR PET-CT Working Group. J Nucl Med 46:1225–1239

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Delbeke, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ et al (2006) Society of Nuclear Medicine procedure guidelines for tumor imaging using FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 47:885–895

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. American College of Radiology (2007) ACR practice guidelines for performing FDG PET/CT in oncology. www.ACR.org

  6. Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S et al (2006) National Cancer Institute. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med 47:1059–1066

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS et al (2007) Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:571–578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al (2007) Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:579–586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M et al (2006) Different histopathological subtypes of Hodgkin lymphoma show significantly different levels of FDG uptake. Hematol Oncol 24:146–150

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. National Cancer Institute: http://www.cancer.gov/cancer-topics/Topic “Staging”

  11. Harris NL, Jaffe ES, Diebold J et al (1999) World Health Organization classification of neoplastic diseases of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues: report of the Clinical Advisory Committee meeting, Airlie House, Virginia, November 1997. J Clin Oncol 17:3835–3849

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ping Lu (2005) Staging and classification of lymphoma. Semin Nucl Med 35:160–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Schoder H, Noy A, Gonen M et al (2005) Intensity of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in positron emission tomography distinguishes between indolent and aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 23:4643–4651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G et al (2003) Utility of FDG-PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood 101:3875–3876

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Tsukamoto N, Kojima M, Hasegawa M et al (2007) The usefulness of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ((18)F-FDG-PET) and a comparison of (18)F-FDG-PET with (67)gallium scintigraphy in the evaluation of lymphoma: relation to histologic subtypes based on the World Health Organization classification. Cancer 110:652–659

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Brepoels L, Stroobants S, De Wever W et al (2008) Positron emission tomography in mantle cell lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma 49:1693–1701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kako S, Izutsu K, Ota Y et al (2007) T-cell FDG-PET in T-cell and NK-cell neoplasms. Ann Oncol 18:1685–1690

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Najjar F et al (2001) Positron emission tomography (PET) with 18F-fiuorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) for the staging of low-grade non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). Ann Oncol 12:825–830

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bruzzi JF, Macapinlac H, Tsimberidou AM et al (2006) Detection of Richter’s transformation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia by PET/CT. J Nucl Med 47:1267–1273

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Najjar F, Hustinx R, Jerusalem G et al (2001) Positron emission tomography (PET) for staging low-grade non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (NHL). Cancer Biother Radiopharm 16:297–304

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hoffmann M, Kletter K, Becherer A et al (2003) 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) for staging and follow-up of marginal zone B-cell lymphoma. Oncology 64:336–340

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. The International Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Prognostic Factors Project (1993) A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med 329:987–994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Solal-Céligny P, Roy P, Colombat P et al (2004) Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index. Blood 104:1258–1265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hasenclever D, Diehl V (1998) A prognostic score for advanced Hodgkin’s disease. International Prognostic Factors Project on Advanced Hodgkin’s Disease. N Engl J Med 339:1506–1514

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Okada J, Oonishi H, Yoshikawa K et al (1994) FDG-PET for predicting the prognosis of malignant lymphoma. Ann Nucl Med 8:187–191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Israel O, Keidar Z, Bar-Shalom R (2004) Positron emission tomography in the evaluation of lymphoma. Semin Nucl Med 34:166–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Seam P, Juweid ME, Cheson BD (2007) The role of FDG-PET scans in patients with lymphoma. Blood 110:3507–3516

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Buchmann I, Reinhardt M, Eisner K et al (2001) 2-(fluorine-18)fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the detection and staging of malignant lymphoma. A bicenter trial. Cancer 91:889–899

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Isasi CR, Lu P, Blaufox MD (2005) A metaanalysis of 18F-2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography in the staging and restaging of patients with lymphoma. Cancer 104:1066–1074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Thill R, Neuerburg J, Fabry U et al (l 997) Comparison of findings with 18-FDG PET and CT in pretherapeutic staging of malignant lymphoma. Nuklearmedizin 36:234–239

    Google Scholar 

  31. Moog F, Bangerter M, Diederichs CG et al (1998) Extranodal malignant lymphoma: detection with FDG PET versus CT. Radiology 206:475–481

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Moog F, Bangerter M, Kotzerke J et al (1998) 18-F-fluo-rodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography as a new approach to detect lymphomatous bone marrow. J Clin Oncol 16:603–609

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Carr R, Barrington SF, Madan B et al (1998) Detection of lymphoma in bone marrow by whole-body positron emission tomography. Blood 91:3340–3346

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Pakos EE, Fotopoulos AD, Ioannidis JP (2005) 18F-FDG PET for evaluation of bone marrow infiltration in staging of lymphoma: a meta-analysis. J Nucl Med 46:958–963

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Schaefer NG, Hany TF, Taverna C et al (2004) Non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease: coregistered FDG PET and CT at staging and restaging — do we need contrast-enhanced CT? Radiology 232:823–829

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Raanani P, Shasha Y, Perry C et al (2006) Is CT scan still necessary for staging in Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients in the PET/CT era? Ann Oncol 17:117–122

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Rodríguez-Vigil B, Gómez-León N, Pinilla I et al (2006) PET/CT in lymphoma: prospective study of enhanced full-dose PET/CT versus unenhanced low-dose PET/CT. J Nucl Med 47:1643–1648

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hicks RJ, MacManus MP, Seymour JF (2005) Initial staging of lymphoma with positron emission tomography and computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med 35:165–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bangerter M, Kotzerke J, Griesshammer M et al (1999) Positron emission tomography with 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in the staging and follow-up of lymphoma in the chest. Acta Oncol 38:799–804

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Cremerius U, Fabry U, Neuerburg J et al (1998) Positron emission tomography with 18F-FDG to detect residual disease after therapy for malignant lymphoma. Nucl Med Commun 19:1055–1063

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Spaepen K, Mortelmans L (2001) Evaluation of treatment response in patients with lymphoma using [18F]FDG-PET: differences between non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease. Q J Nucl Med 45:269–273

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B (1999) Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol 17:1244

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM et al (2005) Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by integrated International Workshop criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 23:4652–4661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF et al (1999) Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for posttreatment evaluation in Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood 94:429–433

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Mikhaeel NG, Timothy AR, O’Doherty MJ et al (2000) 18-FDG-PET as a prognostic indicator in the treatment of aggressive Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma-comparison with CT. Leuk Lymphoma 39:543–553

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Jerusalem G, Hustinx R, Beguin Y, Fillet G (2005) Evaluation of therapy for lymphoma. Semin Nucl Med 35:186–196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Terasawa T, Nihashi T, Hotta T, Nagai H (2008) 18F-FDG PET for posttherapy assessment of Hodgkin’s disease and aggressive Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a systematic review. J Nucl Med 49:13–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kelloff GJ, Sullivan DM, Wilson W et al (2007) FDG-PET lymphoma demonstration project invitational workshop. Acad Radiol 14:330–339

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Kazama T, Faria SC, Varavithya V et al (2005) FDG PET in the evaluation of treatment for lymphoma: clinical usefulness and pitfalls. Radiographics 25:191–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Abdel-Dayem HM, Rosen G, El-Zeftawy H et al (1999) Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose splenic uptake from extramedullary hematopoiesis after granulocyte colony-stimulating factor stimulation. Clin Nucl Med 24:319–322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Gundlapalli S, Ojha B, Mountz JM (2002) Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: confounding F-18 FDG uptake in outpatient positron emission tomographic facilities for patients receiving ongoing treatment of lymphoma. Clin Nucl Med 27:140–141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ferdinand B, Gupta P, Kramer EL (2004) Spectrum of thymic uptake at 18F-FDG PET. Radiographics 24:1611–1616

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Joyce JM, Degirmenci B, Jacobs S et al (2005) FDG PET CT assessment of treatment response after yttrium-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan radioimmunotherapy. Clin Nucl Med 30: 564–568

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ulaner GA, Colletti PM, Conti PS (2008) B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: PET/CT evaluation after 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan radioimmunotherapy—initial experience. Radiology 246: 895–902

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Zinzani PL, Tani M, Fanti S et al (2008) A phase II trial of CHOP chemotherapy followed by yttrium 90 ibritumomab tiuxetan (Zevalin) for previously untreated elderly diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients. Ann Oncol 19:769–773

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Johnston PB, Wiseman GA, Micallef IN (2008) Positron emission tomography using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose pre-and post-autologous stem cell transplant in non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 41:919–925

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Schot BW, Zijlstra JM, Sluiter WJ et al (2007) Early FDG-PET assessment in combination with clinical risk scores determines prognosis in recurring lymphoma. Blood 109:486–491

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Filmont JE, Gisselbrecht C, Cuenca X (2007) The impact of pre-and post-transplantation positron emission tomography using 18-fluorodeoxyglucose on poor-prognosis lymphoma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation. Cancer 110:1361–1369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA

    Dominique Delbeke

Authors
  1. Dominique Delbeke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Radiology, University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland

    J. Hodler

  2. Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland

    G. K. von Schulthess

  3. Kilchberg/Zurich, Switzerland

    Ch. L. Zollikofer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Italia

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Delbeke, D. (2011). Lymphoma: Differential Diagnosis of Mediastinal Masses and Response. In: Hodler, J., von Schulthess, G.K., Zollikofer, C.L. (eds) Diseases of the Heart and Chest, Including Breast 2011–2014. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1938-6_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1938-6_28

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Milano

  • Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1937-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1938-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation