You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 299 No. 8, February 27, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letter
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Oncology
 •Cervical Cancer
 •Radiologic Imaging, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

False-Positive Rate of Posttherapy Positron Emission Tomography in Cervical Cancer

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: In their study of tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma, Dr Schwarz and colleagues1 found a 3-year cause-specific survival of 43% in patients with cervical cancer who had persistent positron emission tomography (PET) with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake in the irradiated region following therapy. However, it is not clear what percentage of patients with persistent FDG activity had truly persistent neoplastic disease.

The authors note one study that has shown that residual FDG uptake in normal lung tissue may have positive correlation with non–small-cell lung cancer tumor responsiveness,2 yet there has been discussion in other cervical cancer studies that residual FDG-PET signal in the pelvis may not always represent persistent tumor activity.3-4 It would be helpful to know if the authors were able to determine by biopsy or by clinical course the false-positive rate of posttherapy FDG-PET as an early determination of local failure.

Financial Disclosures: . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Geoffrey R. Oxnard, MD
goxnard@partners.org
Department of Medicine
Massachusetts General Hospital
Boston



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Association of Posttherapy Positron Emission Tomography With Tumor Response and Survival in Cervical Carcinoma
Julie K. Schwarz, Barry A. Siegel, Farrokh Dehdashti, and Perry W. Grigsby
JAMA. 2007;298(19):2289-2295.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTER

False-Positive Rate of Posttherapy Positron Emission Tomography in Cervical Cancer—Reply
Julie K. Schwarz, Barry A. Siegel, Farrokh Dehdashti, and Perry W. Grigsby
JAMA. 2008;299(8):898.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Perspectives on the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer: Focus on Radiotherapy
Montie et al.
Am Soc Clin Oncol Ed Book 2009;2009:270-274.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.