4.7 Review

Clinical imaging of cancer metastasis

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 36, Issue 13, Pages 1661-1670

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-8049(00)00154-4

Keywords

imaging; PET scan; MRI; fluorescence spectroscopy; nuclear medicine; cancer; optical coherence tomography

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tumour imaging is an essential part of the practice of oncology, with a crucial role in screening programmes and in diagnosis and staging of established disease. Furthermore, the assessment of tumour size by imaging, usually with computer tomography (CT) scanning, is a key component in determining the tumour response to therapy both in clinical trials and in daily oncology practice. Techniques such as CT, ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provide high resolution anatomical images with detailed structural information. However, these imaging modalities yield limited functional information on the tumour tissues and often cannot distinguish residual disease from non-viable or necrotic tumour masses, nor can they detect minimal residual disease. In contrast, radiopharmaceutical imaging and, in particular, positron emission tomography (PET) can give some functional information about the underlying tissues. The possibility of refining these techniques and also the emergence of newer imaging modalities that call detect changes in cancers at the physiological, cellular or molecular levels, gives rise to the notion that these methods will have implications for drug development strategies and also future clinical management. In this review, we briefly discuss the current role of imaging in clinical practice, describe some of the advances in imaging modalities currently undergoing evaluation, and speculate on the future role of these techniques in developmental therapeutics programmes. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available