<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>West Asia Organization for Cancer Prevention (WAOCP), APOCP's West Asia Chapter.</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>1513-7368</Issn>
				<Volume>18</Volume>
				<Issue>3</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2017</Year>
					<Month>03</Month>
					<Day>01</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Comparison between MR Perfusion and 18F-FDG PET in Differentiating Tumor Recurrence from Nonneoplastic Contrast-enhancing Tissue</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle></VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>759</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>763</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">44586</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.22034/APJCP.2017.18.3.759</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>EN</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Yogesh </FirstName>
					<LastName>Kumar</LastName>
<Affiliation>Yale New Haven Health at Bridgeport Hospital, Department of Radiology, 267 Grant Street, Bridgeport, CT, USA</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Nishant </FirstName>
					<LastName>Gupta</LastName>
<Affiliation>St. Vincent&amp;#039;s Medical Center ,
Department of Radiology, 2800 Main Street, Bridgeport, CT, USA</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Manisha </FirstName>
					<LastName>Mangla</LastName>
<Affiliation>SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse NY, USA</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Kusum </FirstName>
					<LastName>Hooda</LastName>
<Affiliation>Yale New Haven Health at Bridgeport Hospital, Department of Radiology, 267 Grant Street, Bridgeport, CT, USA</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Rajiv </FirstName>
					<LastName>Mangla</LastName>
<Affiliation>SUNY Upstate
Medical University, Department of Radiology, 750 East Adams Street, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
			<History>
				<PubDate PubStatus="received">
					<Year>2017</Year>
					<Month>02</Month>
					<Day>08</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</History>
		<Abstract> &lt;br /&gt; &lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Objective: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Comparison of the accuracy of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET for differentiating tumor progression from nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Methods and Materials: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Retrospective review of MR perfusion and 18-FDG-PET in 23 cases of primary brain tumors (17 high grade and 6 low grade glial neoplasms) and 5 cases of metastatic lesions with enhancing lesions on post-treatment MRI was performed. The accuracy of MR perfusion versus 18-FDG-PET for distinguishing between nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue and tumor recurrence was assessed. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Results: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Both CBV (p&lt;0.004) and SUV (p&lt;0.02) are higher in recurrent tumors than necrosis. MR perfusion has an accuracy of 94.5% for differentiating between tumor recurrence and necrosis, while 18-FDG-PET has an accuracy of 85.1% for differentiating between tumor recurrence and nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Conclusion: &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Overall, &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;recurrent tumor demonstrates significantly higher CBV and SUV than nonneoplastic contrast-enhancing tissue. However, &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: Times New Roman,Times New Roman; font-size: small;&quot;&gt;MR perfusion appears to be more accurate than FDG PET for distinguishing the two entities. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</Abstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Radiation necrosis</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">MR perfusion</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">PET-CT</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">FDG</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">https://journal.waocp.org/article_44586_35f3db6801608d47a3fba1e0b91e4eea.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
