Does 2-FDG-PET Accurately Reflect Quantitative In vivo Glucose Utilization?

作者: Jorge R. Barrio , Sung-Cheng Huang , Nagichettiar Satyamurthy , Claudio S. Scafoglio , Amy S. Yu

DOI: 10.2967/JNUMED.119.237446

关键词:

摘要: 2-Deoxy-2-18F-fluoro-d-glucose (2-FDG) with PET is undeniably useful in the clinic, being able, among other uses, to monitor change over time using 2-FDG SUV metric. This report suggests some potentially serious caveats for this and related roles PET. Most critical assumption that there an exact proportionality between glucose metabolism metabolism, called lumped constant, or LC. describes LC not constant a specific tissue may be variable before after disease treatment. The purpose of work deny clinical value PET; it reminder when one extends use appropriately qualified imaging method, new observations arise further validation would necessary. current understanding glucose-based energetics vivo based on quantification metabolic rates PET, method permits noninvasive assessment various human disorders. However, good substrate only facilitated-glucose transporters (GLUTs), sodium-dependent cotransporters (SGLTs), which have recently been shown distributed multiple tissues. Thus, GLUT-mediated utilization measured by masked substantial role functional SGLTs transport use. Therefore, under these circumstances, used quantify should expected remain constant. variations especially significant tumors, particularly at different stages cancer development, affecting accuracy quantitative measures limiting prognostic 2-FDG, as well its monitoring treatments. SGLT-mediated can estimated α-methyl-4-deoxy-4-18F-fluoro-d-glucopyranoside (Me-4FDG). Using both Me-4FDG provide more complete picture via GLUT SGLT health states. Given widespread infer relevant appreciate potential limitations surrogate rate reasons variability Even readout study parameter, important, if changes course progression (e.g., evolving tumor).

参考文章(42)
Jeffrey A. Engelman, Lewis C. Cantley, A sweet new role for EGFR in cancer. Cancer Cell. ,vol. 13, pp. 375- 376 ,(2008) , 10.1016/J.CCR.2008.04.008
Robert A. Gatenby, Robert J. Gillies, Why do cancers have high aerobic glycolysis? Nature Reviews Cancer. ,vol. 4, pp. 891- 899 ,(2004) , 10.1038/NRC1478
Ernest M. Wright, Donald D. F. Loo, Bruce A. Hirayama, Biology of Human Sodium Glucose Transporters Physiological Reviews. ,vol. 91, pp. 733- 794 ,(2011) , 10.1152/PHYSREV.00055.2009
Amy S. Yu, Bruce A. Hirayama, Gerald Timbol, Jie Liu, Ana Diez-Sampedro, Vladimir Kepe, Nagichettiar Satyamurthy, Sung-Cheng Huang, Ernest M. Wright, Jorge R. Barrio, Regional distribution of SGLT activity in rat brain in vivo American Journal of Physiology-cell Physiology. ,vol. 304, ,(2013) , 10.1152/AJPCELL.00317.2012
Roman Duelli, Wolfgang Kuschinsky, Brain Glucose Transporters: Relationship to Local Energy Demand Physiology. ,vol. 16, pp. 71- 76 ,(2001) , 10.1152/PHYSIOLOGYONLINE.2001.16.2.71
R. L. Wahl, H. Jacene, Y. Kasamon, M. A. Lodge, From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors The Journal of Nuclear Medicine. ,vol. 50, ,(2009) , 10.2967/JNUMED.108.057307
M. Reivich, A. Alavi, A. Wolf, J. Fowler, J. Russell, C. Arnett, R. R. MacGregor, C. Y. Shiue, H. Atkins, A. Anand, R. Dann, J. H. Greenberg, Glucose metabolic rate kinetic model parameter determination in humans: the lumped constants and rate constants for [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose and [11C]deoxyglucose. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism. ,vol. 5, pp. 179- 192 ,(1985) , 10.1038/JCBFM.1985.24
J. E. G. Barnett, G. D. Holman, K. A. Munday, Structural requirements for binding to the sugar-transport system of the human erythrocyte Biochemical Journal. ,vol. 131, pp. 211- 221 ,(1973) , 10.1042/BJ1310211
Adriaan A. Lammertsma, Jeffrey Yap, David A. Mankoff, Steve Bacharach, Joel Karp, Lalitha K. Shankar, John M. Hoffman, Barry A. Siegel, Steven Larson, Daniel Sullivan, Michael M. Graham, Annick Van den Abbeele, Consensus Recommendations for the Use of 18F-FDG PET as an Indicator of Therapeutic Response in Patients in National Cancer Institute Trials The Journal of Nuclear Medicine. ,vol. 47, pp. 1059- 1066 ,(2006)