% 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{Werner:863609,
      author       = {Werner, Jan-Michael and Stoffels, Gabriele and
                      Lichtenstein, Thorsten and Borggrefe, Jan and Lohmann,
                      Philipp and Ceccon, Garry and Shah, Nadim J. and Fink,
                      Gereon R. and Langen, Karl-Josef and Kabbasch, Christoph and
                      Galldiks, Norbert},
      title        = {{D}ifferentiation of treatment-related changes from tumour
                      progression: a direct comparison between dynamic {FET} {PET}
                      and {ADC} values obtained from {DWI} {MRI}},
      journal      = {European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging},
      volume       = {46},
      number       = {9},
      issn         = {1619-7089},
      address      = {Heidelberg [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Springer-Verl.},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2019-03621},
      pages        = {1889-1901},
      year         = {2019},
      abstract     = {BackgroundFollowing brain cancer treatment, the capacity of
                      anatomical MRI to differentiate neoplastic tissue from
                      treatment-related changes (e.g., pseudoprogression) is
                      limited. This study compared apparent diffusion coefficients
                      (ADC) obtained by diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) with static
                      and dynamic parameters of O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine
                      (FET) PET for the differentiation of treatment-related
                      changes from tumour progression.Patients and
                      methodsForty-eight pretreated high-grade glioma patients
                      with anatomical MRI findings suspicious for progression
                      (median time elapsed since last treatment was 16 weeks) were
                      investigated using DWI and dynamic FET PET. Maximum and mean
                      tumour-to-brain ratios (TBRmax, TBRmean) as well as dynamic
                      parameters (time-to-peak and slope values) of FET uptake
                      were calculated. For mean ADC calculation,
                      regions-of-interest analyses were performed on ADC maps
                      calculated from DWI coregistered with the contrast-enhanced
                      MR image. Diagnoses were confirmed neuropathologically
                      $(21\%)$ or clinicoradiologically. Diagnostic performance
                      was evaluated using receiver-operating-characteristic
                      analyses or Fisher’s exact test for a combinational
                      approach.ResultsTen of 48 patients had treatment-related
                      changes $(21\%).$ The diagnostic performance of FET PET was
                      significantly higher (threshold for both TBRmax and TBRmean,
                      1.95; accuracy, $83\%;$ AUC, 0.89 ± 0.05;
                      P < 0.001) than that of ADC values (threshold ADC,
                      1.09 × 10−3 mm2/s; accuracy, $69\%;$ AUC,
                      0.73 ± 0.09; P = 0.13). The addition of static FET
                      PET parameters to ADC values increased the latter’s
                      accuracy to $89\%.$ The highest accuracy was achieved by
                      combining static and dynamic FET PET parameters $(93\%).$
                      Moreover, in contrast to ADC values, TBRs <1.95 at suspected
                      progression predicted a significantly longer survival
                      (P = 0.01).ConclusionsData suggest that static and
                      dynamic FET PET provide valuable information concerning the
                      differentiation of early treatment-related changes from
                      tumour progression and outperform ADC measurement for this
                      highly relevant clinical question.},
      cin          = {INM-3 / INM-4},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)INM-4-20090406},
      pnm          = {572 - (Dys-)function and Plasticity (POF3-572)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-572},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:31203420},
      UT           = {WOS:000475673300015},
      doi          = {10.1007/s00259-019-04384-7},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/863609},
}