ライフサイエンスコーパス: FMISO

1 FMISO PET scans before and 1 to 2 weeks after starting C

2 ith glioblastoma underwent T1Gd, T2, and 18F-FMISO-11 studies preceded surgical resection or biopsy,

3 8F-FMISO images were scaled to the blood 18F-FMISO activity to create tumor-to-blood ratio (T/B) imag

4 that the distribution of hypoxia seen on 18F-FMISO is correlated spatially and quantitatively with th

5 assessed by 18F-fluoromisonidazole PET (18F-FMISO).

6 The 18F-FMISO images were scaled to the blood 18F-FMISO activity

7 imetry were measured in patients during [18F]FMISO and 15O PET imaging.

8 Fluorine 18-labeled fluoromisonidazole ([18F]FMISO), a PET tracer that undergoes irreversible selecti

9 The organ doses for [18F]FMISO are comparable to those associated with other comm

10 cally different from those reported for [18F]FMISO in the same cell lines (700-1500 ppm).

11 tabolites by 4 h; comparable values for [18F]FMISO were 36% and 57%, respectively.

12 gested that the threshold for increased [18F]FMISO trapping is probably 15 mm Hg or lower.

13 ents following intravenous injection of [18F]FMISO.

14 asma of mice injected with [18F]FETA or [18F]FMISO.

15 nitroimidazole is metabolized less than [18F]FMISO.

16 oxygen dependency of binding similar to [18F]FMISO in vitro and displaying less retention in liver an

17 tudy included 10 patients who underwent [18F]FMISO and 15O PET within 1 to 8 days of severe or modera

18 orts of 10 healthy volunteers underwent [18F]FMISO or 15O PET.

19 Hypoxic volumes were quantified from each FMISO-PET scan following standard techniques.

20 Hypoxia, indicated by (18)F-FMISO accumulation, was higher in the SaOS-2/Caprin-1 an

21 was confirmed, indicating that dynamic (18)F-FMISO allows stratification of patients into different r

22 ed significantly different volumes for (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT (P < 0.001).

23 roducibility of the visual analyses of (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT PET/CT images was demonstrated using

24 e 0.81 for (18)F-FDG and 0.77 for both (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT using the 2-level scale.

25 nterobserver agreement was low for the (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT volume measurements.

26 SUVmax of the aorta could be used for (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-FLT.

27 (18)F-FMISO and (18)F-HX4 had similar intermediate tumor uptak

28 were 0.13 and 0.19, respectively, for (18)F-FMISO and 0.2 and 0.3, respectively, for (18)F-FLT.

29 maximum SUV (SUVmax) of the aorta for (18)F-FMISO and 1.3 x SUVmax of the muscle for (18)F-FLT.

30 om pharmacokinetic modeling of dynamic (18)F-FMISO and maximum tumor-to-muscle ratio (TMR(max)) at 4

31 animals, using the hypoxic cell tracer (18)F-FMISO and the reporter substrate (124)I-FIAU, yielded si

32 administration of 42.1 +/- 3.9 MBq of (18)F-FMISO by tail vein injection.

33 Variable (18)F-FMISO delivery was observed across lesions, as indicated

34 (18)F-FMISO distribution volume deviated from the expected val

35 1/k2, and k3-surrogates for perfusion, (18)F-FMISO distribution volume, and hypoxia-mediated entrapme

36 umor hypoxia (k3), perfusion (K1), and (18)F-FMISO distribution volume.

37 cancer patients underwent 0- to 30-min (18)F-FMISO dPET in a customized immobilization mask, followed

38 0 min, facilitating the translation of (18)F-FMISO dPET into the clinic.

39 Conclusion:(18)F-FMISO dPET provides the data necessary to generate param

40 udy, pharmacokinetic analysis (PKA) of (18)F-FMISO dynamic PET extended to 3 h after injection is rep

41 (18)F-FMISO equilibrates in normoxic tissues but is retained u

42 nt nuclear medicine physicians with no (18)F-FMISO experience read the scans.

43 icine physician with over 2 decades of (18)F-FMISO experience was the reference standard.

44 n: Nuclear medicine physicians without (18)F-FMISO hypoxia PET reading experience demonstrate much im

45 clear medicine physicians to interpret (18)F-FMISO hypoxia PET.

46 (18)F-FMISO image parameters, including a hypoxia metric, M (F

47 ment, the low signal-to-noise ratio of (18)F-FMISO in the liver limited its use in HCC.

48 zole was coadministered with the first (18)F-FMISO injection, and 2-(2-nitro-1H-imidazol-1-yl)-N-(2,2

49 Conclusion:(18)F-FMISO kinetic modeling reveals a more detailed response

50 These findings support the use of (18)F-FMISO kinetic modeling to more accurately characterize t

51 We derived average values of (18)F-FMISO kinetic parameters for NSCLC lesions as well as fo

52 resulted in a marked reduction in the (18)F-FMISO mean standardized uptake value (SUV(mean)) in appr

53 d to delineate the volume of increased (18)F-FMISO or (18)F-FLT uptake.

54 Two hundred twenty-three (18)F-FMISO patient studies had detectable surrogate blood reg

55 ents), (18)F-FLT PET (20 patients), or (18)F-FMISO PET (20 patients), for a total of 31 patients, was

56 r), CT (of the anatomy), and late-time (18)F-FMISO PET (of the T/B) and parametric images of K(i) (po

57 cally adaptive bayesian algorithm) and (18)F-FMISO PET (using a mean contralateral image + 3.3 SDs) a

58 Simple static analysis of (18)F-FMISO PET captures both the intensity (TBmax) and the sp

59 (18)F-FMISO PET could distinguish between different tumor resp

60 Patients underwent MR and (18)F-FMISO PET imaging at baseline and 28 days.

61 a in inflammation using (18)F-FAZA and (18)F-FMISO PET imaging represents a promising new tool for un

62 diagnosed patients underwent a dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET scan before chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

63 (18)F-FMISO PET was performed 3 h before and 24 h after treatm

64 Serial dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET was performed to investigate changes in tumor

65 the present study, static and dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET were performed with mice bearing either U87MG

66 Dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET with pharmacokinetics modeling, complementary

67 Tumor volumes were determined, MRI and (18)F-FMISO PET-derived parameters calculated, and Spearman co

68 erapy, they were examined with dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET/CT 0-240 min after tracer injection.

69 ion and external validation of dynamic (18)F-FMISO PET/CT as a promising method for patient stratific

70 Participants underwent (18)F-FMISO PET/CT before and after bland embolization of HCC.

71 underwent 123 (18)F-FDG PET/CT and 134 (18)F-FMISO PET/CT scans.

72 ling further monitored the kinetics of (18)F-FMISO retention to hypoxic sites after treatment.

73 3-min static (18) F-FDG and a dynamic (18)F-FMISO scan lasting 168 +/- 15 min.

74 Patients underwent 20-min (18)F-FMISO scanning during the 90- to 140-min interval after

75 ciated with DFS when adjusting for the (18)F-FMISO status.

76 However, a reduction in (18)F-FMISO SUV(mean) after DMXAA treatment was indicative of

77 ignificant reduction of mean voxelwise (18)F-FMISO TBR, K1, and K1/k2 in both the 2-d and the 7-d gro

78 re analyzed, the observed reduction in (18)F-FMISO uptake after treatment with cediranib may be mista

79 clarify the ambiguity in interpreting (18)F-FMISO uptake and improve the characterization of lesions

80 discrepancy between k3 maps and total (18)F-FMISO uptake and reducing the dynamic range of total (18

81 y an overlap analysis of the volume of (18)F-FMISO uptake and the volumes of the high CBV regions and

82 nd reducing the dynamic range of total (18)F-FMISO uptake for quantifying the degree of hypoxia.

83 th findings indicate a narrow range of (18)F-FMISO uptake in HCC.

84 (18)F-FMISO uptake in NSCLC patients is strongly associated wi

85 The (18)F-FMISO uptake on PET/CT was assessed by trained experts.

86 ve for hypoxia by visual assessment if (18)F-FMISO uptake was greater than floor-of-mouth uptake.

87 The level and location of hypoxia ((18)F-FMISO uptake, evaluated by tumor-to-blood [T/B] ratio),

88 evertheless exhibited relatively lower (18)F-FMISO uptake.

89 All lesions showed distinct (18)F-FMISO uptake.

90 ibration between the blood and unbound (18)F-FMISO was rapid in all tumors.

91 Dynamic (18)F-FMISO was used to validate a tumor control probability m

92 moral distributions of (124)I-FIAU and (18)F-FMISO were similar, and eGFP, pimonidazole, EF5, and CA9

93 oxia tracers (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) and (18)F-fluoroazomycinarabinoside ((18)F-FAZA).

94 rfusion with (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) dynamic PET (dPET) in head and neck cancer.

95 s of (18)F-labeled fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) dynamic PET to assist the identification of regio

96 imaged with (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) hypoxia PET.

97 (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) is the most widely used PET agent for imaging hyp

98 assessed by (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET and conventional and perfusion MRI before sur

99 s to evaluate (18)F-fluromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET for monitoring the tumor response to the anti

100 (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET is a noninvasive, quantitative imaging techni

101 with dynamic (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET may allow for an improved response assessment

102 d by dynamic (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) PET/CT and the risk of relapse after radiotherapy

103 s with significant (18)F-misonidazole ((18)F-FMISO) uptake in patients with non-small cell lung carci

104 ((18)F-FDG), (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO), and 3'-deoxy-3'-(18)F-fluorothymidine ((18)F-FLT

105 nd uptake of (18)F-fluoromisonidazole ((18)F-FMISO), respectively.

106 PET imaging with (18)F-FDG, (18)F-FMISO, and (18)F-fluoride was performed in these mouse m

107 ectively, 0.59 for (18)F-FDG, 0.43 for (18)F-FMISO, and 0.44 for (18)F-FLT using the 5-level scale; t

108 Ten (18)F-FDG, ten (18)F-FMISO, and ten (18)F-FLT PET/CT examinations were perfor

109 the HT29-9HRE xenograft: (124)I-FIAU, (18)F-FMISO, Hoechst (perfusion), lectin-TRITC (functional blo

110 ed perfusion and therefore delivery of (18)F-FMISO, rather than a reduction in tumor hypoxia.

111 nd 3.1%-78.0% for (18)F-FLT, rCBV, and (18)F-FMISO, respectively.

112 DFS was longer in the (18)F-FMISO-negative patients (P = 0.004).

113 ng RECIST 1.1 (17/34 responders in the (18)F-FMISO-positive group).

114 In (18)F-FMISO-positive patients, the contours of the hypoxic are

115 ncluded, 54 were included, and 34 were (18)F-FMISO-positive, 24 of whom received escalated doses of u

116 adiotracers ((18)F-fluoromisonidazole [(18)F-FMISO], (18)F-flortanidazole [(18)F-HX4], (18)F-fluoroaz

117 ((18)F-FDG, (18)F-fluoromisonidazole [(18)F-FMISO], and (18)F-fluoride) in preclinical mouse models

118 ogenic cell density maps derived from [(18)F]FMISO and [(18)F]FDG PET, respectively.

119 Combining [(18)F]FDG and [(18)F]FMISO PET imaging potentially shifts the success rate of

120 Additionally, [(18)F]-FMISO-PET and oxygen-saturation-mapping-MRI (SatO2-MRI)

121 In vivo, [(18)F]-FMISO-PET imaging was used to quantify changes in oxygen

122 Fluoromisonidazole (FMISO), labeled with the positron emitter 18F, is a usef

123 sing the radiotracer 18F-Fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) has been widely employed to image tumour hypoxia

124 Tumor hypoxia on 18F-fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) positron emission tomography (PET) is associated

125 ns of [18F]FETA and [18F]fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) at 2 and 4 h postinjection in C3H mice bearing KH

126 y of fluorine 18 ((18)F) fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) uptake in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prior to

127 lar proliferation, (18)F-fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) for tissue hypoxia, and (11)C-verapamil for P-gly

128 reoperatively with (18)F-fluoromisonidazole (FMISO)-PET and serial gadolinium-enhanced T1- and T2-wei

129 osensitivity from [(18)F]fluoromisonidazole (FMISO) PET images.

130 Two-hour and four-hour FMISO PET/CT images acquired at baseline and pre-surgery

131 tween hypoxia-related quantitative values in FMISO-PET acquired at 2 and 4 h p.i. in patients with no

132 nonrandomized clinical trials incorporating FMISO PET in the definitive management of HNSCC, persist

133 suggest that pretreatment and intratreatment FMISO PET results may serve as biomarkers for DM risk an

134 : In this study, the relationship between M (FMISO) and the risk of relapse was prospectively validat

135 e parameters, including a hypoxia metric, M (FMISO) , derived from pharmacokinetic modeling of dynami

136 e (GTV), relative hypoxic volume based on M (FMISO) , and a logistic regression model combining GTV a

137 tumor control probability model based on M (FMISO) The prognostic potential with respect to local co

138 In this study, M (FMISO) was the only parameter that was confirmed as prog

139 studies to help define the radiation risk of FMISO-PET imaging.

140 On FMISO PET examination, 73 patients (26.0%) had hypoxia-n

141 ined tumor volume, and the mean intensity on FMISO-PET scaled to the blood activity of the tracer (me

142 2004 to 2021 in which participants received FMISO PET before and during CRT.

143 Our results support that FMISO-PET scans should be performed at 4 h p.i. Developi