Journal
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING
Volume 44, Issue -, Pages S55-S66Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-017-3687-3
Keywords
FDG PET; PERCIST; EORTC criteria; Oncology; Treatment monitoring
Funding
- NCI NIH HHS [P30 CA008748] Funding Source: Medline
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Eighteen years ago, the EORTC PET criteria standardized for the first time response assessment by FDG PET. Response assessment by FDG PET has been further developed and refined by PERCIST (PET response criteria in solid tumors). This review describes the data underlying these two systems for assessing tumor response on FDG PET/CT. It also summarizes recent clinical studies that have compared EORTC criteria and PERCIST with each other as well as with the anatomically based response criteria in solid tumors (RECIST). These studies have shown that response assessment by EORTC criteria and PERCIST leads to very similar response classifications. In contrast, there are significant differences between response assessment by PERCIST and RECIST. Preliminary data also suggest that response assessment by PERCIST is better correlated with patient outcome and may be a better predictor for the effectiveness of new anti-cancer therapies than RECIST. If correct, this could have a significant impact on oncologic drug development. However, confirmation of the better predictive value of response assessment by PERCIST by data from randomized trials is still lacking.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available