Home > Publications database > Assessment of 18F-FET PET-based response in patients with gliomas using the PET RANO 1.0 criteria > print

001     1046027
005     20260122203303.0
024 7 _ |a 10.1093/noajnl/vdaf198
|2 doi
024 7 _ |a 10.34734/FZJ-2025-03667
|2 datacite_doi
037 _ _ |a FZJ-2025-03667
082 _ _ |a 610
100 1 _ |a Galldiks, Norbert
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)143792
|b 0
|e Corresponding author
245 _ _ |a Assessment of 18F-FET PET-based response in patients with gliomas using the PET RANO 1.0 criteria
260 _ _ |a Oxford
|c 2025
|b Oxford University Press
336 7 _ |a article
|2 DRIVER
336 7 _ |a Output Types/Journal article
|2 DataCite
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|b journal
|m journal
|0 PUB:(DE-HGF)16
|s 1769082805_22749
|2 PUB:(DE-HGF)
336 7 _ |a ARTICLE
|2 BibTeX
336 7 _ |a JOURNAL_ARTICLE
|2 ORCID
336 7 _ |a Journal Article
|0 0
|2 EndNote
520 _ _ |a BackgroundWe evaluated the amino acid PET-based response assessment criteria (PET RANO 1.0) for their proficiency in predicting longer survival in patients with gliomas undergoing adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy.MethodsIn a previous study, 38 patients with newly diagnosed grade 4 gliomas according to the World Health Organisation classification underwent O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (18F-FET) PET at baseline and after the second cycle of adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy. The ability of PET parameter changes to predict favorable progression-free and overall survival (PFS, OS) of ≥ 9 and ≥15 months was evaluated. Here, we performed a post-hoc analysis of these PET data to evaluate the PET RANO 1.0 criteria. In addition, the value of the RANO 2.0 criteria for MRI to predict response was evaluated and compared with the PET RANO 1.0 criteria.ResultsAccording to the PET RANO 1.0 criteria, patients with Stable Disease (n = 16), Partial Response (n = 9), or Complete Response (n = 0) had a significantly longer OS than patients with Progressive Disease (n = 13) (16.8 vs. 12.0 months; P = 0.016). This difference remained significant in the multivariate survival analysis (HR, 4.185; 95% CI, 1.715-10.530, P = 0.002). In contrast, PFS was not significantly different between the two groups (9.7 vs. 8.1 months; P = 0.147). PET RANO 1.0 criteria could not identify patients with a PFS ≥ 9 months (P = 0.503) or OS ≥ 15 months (P = 0.722). RANO 2.0 criteria for MRI was unable to predict a longer PFS (8.8 vs. 9.8 months; P = 0.565) or OS (16.4 vs. 16.8 months; P = 0.625).ConclusionsOur data suggest that PET RANO 1.0 criteria identify survival differences between predefined groups.
536 _ _ |a 5252 - Brain Dysfunction and Plasticity (POF4-525)
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5252
|c POF4-525
|f POF IV
|x 0
588 _ _ |a Dataset connected to DataCite
700 1 _ |a Ceccon, Garry
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 1
700 1 _ |a Wollring, Michael Matthias
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)190394
|b 2
700 1 _ |a Stetter, Isabelle
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 3
700 1 _ |a Werner, Jan-Michael
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 4
700 1 _ |a Peplinski, Jana-Marie
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 5
700 1 _ |a Rosen, Jurij
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 6
700 1 _ |a Rosen, Elena K.
|0 P:(DE-HGF)0
|b 7
700 1 _ |a Fink, Gereon Rudolf
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)131720
|b 8
|u fzj
700 1 _ |a Langen, Karl-Josef
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)131777
|b 9
|u fzj
700 1 _ |a Lohmann, Philipp
|0 P:(DE-Juel1)145110
|b 10
|u fzj
773 _ _ |a 10.1093/noajnl/vdaf198
|g p. vdaf198
|0 PERI:(DE-600)3009682-0
|n 1
|p vdaf198
|t Neuro-oncology advances
|v 7
|y 2025
|x 2632-2498
856 4 _ |u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1046027/files/Invoice_SOA25LT011306.pdf
856 4 _ |y OpenAccess
|u https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1046027/files/vdaf198.pdf
909 C O |o oai:juser.fz-juelich.de:1046027
|p openaire
|p open_access
|p OpenAPC
|p driver
|p VDB
|p openCost
|p dnbdelivery
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 0
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)143792
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 8
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)131720
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 9
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)131777
910 1 _ |a Forschungszentrum Jülich
|0 I:(DE-588b)5008462-8
|k FZJ
|b 10
|6 P:(DE-Juel1)145110
913 1 _ |a DE-HGF
|b Key Technologies
|l Natural, Artificial and Cognitive Information Processing
|1 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-520
|0 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-525
|3 G:(DE-HGF)POF4
|2 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-500
|4 G:(DE-HGF)POF
|v Decoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction
|9 G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5252
|x 0
914 1 _ |y 2025
915 p c |a APC keys set
|0 PC:(DE-HGF)0000
|2 APC
915 p c |a DOAJ Journal
|0 PC:(DE-HGF)0003
|2 APC
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0200
|2 StatID
|b SCOPUS
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a WoS
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0112
|2 StatID
|b Emerging Sources Citation Index
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a JCR
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0100
|2 StatID
|b NEURO-ONCOL ADV : 2022
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC 4.0
|0 LIC:(DE-HGF)CCBYNC4
|2 HGFVOC
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0501
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ Seal
|d 2024-04-03T10:37:56Z
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0500
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ
|d 2024-04-03T10:37:56Z
915 _ _ |a Fees
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0700
|2 StatID
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0150
|2 StatID
|b Web of Science Core Collection
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a IF < 5
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)9900
|2 StatID
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a OpenAccess
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0510
|2 StatID
915 _ _ |a Peer Review
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0030
|2 StatID
|b DOAJ : Anonymous peer review
|d 2024-04-03T10:37:56Z
915 _ _ |a Article Processing Charges
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0561
|2 StatID
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0300
|2 StatID
|b Medline
|d 2024-12-18
915 _ _ |a DBCoverage
|0 StatID:(DE-HGF)0199
|2 StatID
|b Clarivate Analytics Master Journal List
|d 2024-12-18
920 _ _ |l yes
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406
|k INM-3
|l Kognitive Neurowissenschaften
|x 0
920 1 _ |0 I:(DE-Juel1)INM-4-20090406
|k INM-4
|l Physik der Medizinischen Bildgebung
|x 1
980 _ _ |a journal
980 _ _ |a VDB
980 _ _ |a UNRESTRICTED
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406
980 _ _ |a I:(DE-Juel1)INM-4-20090406
980 _ _ |a APC
980 1 _ |a APC
980 1 _ |a FullTexts

LibraryCollectionCLSMajorCLSMinorLanguageAuthor
Marc 21