Evaluating tumor response with FDG PET: Updates on PERCIST, comparison with EORTC criteria and clues to future developments Journal Article

   


Authors: Pinker, K.; Riedl, C.; Weber, W. A.
Article Title: Evaluating tumor response with FDG PET: Updates on PERCIST, comparison with EORTC criteria and clues to future developments
Abstract: 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. © 2017, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Keywords: oncology; fdg pet; percist; eortc criteria; treatment monitoring
Journal Title: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Volume: 44
Issue: 1 Suppl.
ISSN: 1619-7070
Publisher: Springer  
Date Published: 2017-08-01
Start Page: S55
End Page: S66
Language: English
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-017-3687-3
PROVIDER: scopus
PMCID: PMC5542859
PUBMED: 28361188
DOI/URL:

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85016641563&doi=10.1007%2fs00259-017-3687-3&partnerID=40&md5=8fd0b9b63b74057fa3d4175c6d388bbc
Notes: Review -- Export Date: 1 September 2017 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
What is Altmetric?
Citation Impact
What is Dimensions Citation Badge?
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Christopher Riedl
    60 Riedl
  2. Wolfgang Andreas Weber
    173 Weber
  3. Katja Pinker-Domenig
    213 Pinker-Domenig
Related MSK Work