% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Galldiks:255687,
      author       = {Galldiks, N. and Stoffels, G. and Filss, C. and Rapp, M.
                      and Blau, T. and Tscherpel, C. and Ceccon, G. and Dunkl, V.
                      and Weinzierl, M. and Stoffel, M. and Sabel, M. and Fink, G.
                      R. and Shah, N. J. and Langen, K.-J.},
      title        = {{T}he use of dynamic {O}-(2-18{F}-fluoroethyl)-{L}-tyrosine
                      {PET} in the diagnosis of patients with progressive and
                      recurrent glioma},
      journal      = {Neuro-Oncology},
      volume       = {17},
      number       = {9},
      issn         = {1523-5866},
      address      = {Oxford},
      publisher    = {Oxford Univ. Press},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2015-05820},
      pages        = {1293-1300},
      year         = {2015},
      abstract     = {Background We evaluated the diagnostic value of static and
                      dynamic O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-l-tyrosine (18F-FET) PET
                      parameters in patients with progressive or recurrent
                      glioma.Methods We retrospectively analyzed 132 dynamic
                      18F-FET PET and conventional MRI scans of 124 glioma
                      patients (primary World Health Organization grade II, n =
                      55; grade III, n = 19; grade IV, n = 50; mean age, 52 ± 14
                      y). Patients had been referred for PET assessment with
                      clinical signs and/or MRI findings suggestive of tumor
                      progression or recurrence based on Response Assessment in
                      Neuro-Oncology criteria. Maximum and mean tumor/brain ratios
                      of 18F-FET uptake were determined (20–40 min
                      post-injection) as well as tracer uptake kinetics (ie, time
                      to peak and patterns of the time–activity curves).
                      Diagnoses were confirmed histologically $(95\%)$ or by
                      clinical follow-up $(5\%).$ Diagnostic accuracies of PET and
                      MR parameters for the detection of tumor progression or
                      recurrence were evaluated by receiver operating
                      characteristic analyses/chi-square test.Results Tumor
                      progression or recurrence could be diagnosed in 121 of 132
                      cases $(92\%).$ MRI and 18F-FET PET findings were concordant
                      in $84\%$ and discordant in $16\%.$ Compared with the
                      diagnostic accuracy of conventional MRI to diagnose tumor
                      progression or recurrence $(85\%),$ a higher accuracy
                      $(93\%)$ was achieved by 18F-FET PET when a mean tumor/brain
                      ratio ≥2.0 or time to peak <45 min was present
                      (sensitivity, $93\%;$ specificity, $100\%;$ accuracy,
                      $93\%;$ positive predictive value, $100\%;$ P <
                      .001).Conclusion Static and dynamic 18F-FET PET parameters
                      differentiate progressive or recurrent glioma from
                      treatment-related nonneoplastic changes with higher accuracy
                      than conventional MRI.},
      cin          = {INM-3 / INM-4 / JARA-BRAIN},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)INM-4-20090406 /
                      $I:(DE-82)080010_20140620$},
      pnm          = {573 - Neuroimaging (POF3-573)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-573},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000361306400015},
      pubmed       = {pmid:26008606},
      doi          = {10.1093/neuonc/nov088},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/255687},
}