151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27796542)
1. Reply to letter of Adams and Kwee: Critical considerations on the predictive value of end-of-treatment FDG/PET in lymphoma.
Fallanca F; Alongi P; Incerti E; Gianolli L; Picchio M; Kayani I; Bomanji JB
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2017 Feb; 44(2):344-345. PubMed ID: 27796542
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Critical considerations on the predictive value of end-of-treatment FDG-PET in lymphoma.
Adams HJA; Kwee TC
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2017 Feb; 44(2):342-343. PubMed ID: 27783106
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The role of FDG PET in the management of lymphoma: practical guidelines.
Kirby AM; George Mikhaeel N
Nucl Med Commun; 2007 May; 28(5):355-7. PubMed ID: 17414884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Response to the letter by Adams and Kwee, entitled: "Unproven value of end-of-treatment FDG-PET in Hodgkin lymphoma".
Hindié E; Mesguich C; Bouabdallah K; Milpied N
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2017 Oct; 44(11):1937-1939. PubMed ID: 28707119
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The role of FDG PET in the management of lymphoma: what is the evidence base?
Kirby AM; Mikhaeel NG
Nucl Med Commun; 2007 May; 28(5):335-54. PubMed ID: 17414883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET/CT for clinical evaluation at the end of treatment of HL and NHL: a comparison of the Deauville Criteria (DC) and the International Harmonization Project Criteria (IHPC).
Fallanca F; Alongi P; Incerti E; Gianolli L; Picchio M; Kayani I; Bomanji J
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2016 Sep; 43(10):1837-48. PubMed ID: 27154522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. PET-Derived Quantitative Metrics for Response and Prognosis in Lymphoma.
Kostakoglu L; Chauvie S
PET Clin; 2019 Jul; 14(3):317-329. PubMed ID: 31084772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. PET imaging for response assessment in lymphoma: potential and limitations.
Schöder H; Moskowitz C
Radiol Clin North Am; 2008 Mar; 46(2):225-41, viii. PubMed ID: 18619378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of therapy for lymphoma.
Jerusalem G; Hustinx R; Beguin Y; Fillet G
Semin Nucl Med; 2005 Jul; 35(3):186-96. PubMed ID: 16098292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 18F-FDG-PET in patients with malignant lymphoma having long-term follow-up: staging and restaging, and evaluation of treatment response and recurrence.
Isohashi K; Tatsumi M; Higuchi I; Inoue A; Nakajo K; Ishikawa J; Shimosegawa E; Kanakura Y; Nakamura H; Hatazawa J
Ann Nucl Med; 2008 Nov; 22(9):795-802. PubMed ID: 19039558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Overestimated value of FDG-PET based bone marrow evaluation in lymphoma: Response to Adams and Kwee.
Ujjani CS; Cheson BD
Br J Haematol; 2017 Oct; 179(2):337-339. PubMed ID: 27391783
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Hodgkin lymphoma: is there really a need for interim and end-of-treatment FDG-PET evaluations? - Response to Adams & Kwee.
Mesguich C; Cazeau AL; Bouabdallah K; Hindié E
Br J Haematol; 2018 Apr; 181(1):124-125. PubMed ID: 28106255
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. PET/CT: appropriate application in lymphoma.
Wang X
Chin Clin Oncol; 2015 Mar; 4(1):4. PubMed ID: 25841711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interim PET After Two ABVD Cycles in Early-Stage Hodgkin Lymphoma: Outcomes Following the Continuation of Chemotherapy Plus Radiotherapy. In Reply to Adams and Kwee.
Simontacchi G; Filippi AR; Ciammella P; Ricardi U
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2015 Nov; 93(3):725-6. PubMed ID: 26461018
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Prognostic value of early 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and gallium-67 scintigraphy in aggressive lymphoma: a prospective comparative study.
Fruchart C; Reman O; Le Stang N; Musafiri D; Cheze S; Macro M; Switsers O; Aide N; Liegard M; Levaltier X; Peny AM; Leporrier M; Bardet S
Leuk Lymphoma; 2006 Dec; 47(12):2547-57. PubMed ID: 17169799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The added value of metabolic imaging with FDG-PET in oesophageal cancer: prognostic role and prediction of response to treatment.
Bombardieri E
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging; 2006 Jul; 33(7):753-8. PubMed ID: 16733687
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. FDG-PET interpretation in tonsillar lymphoma.
Hsu CH; Lee TJ; Lee FP; Lee CM; Lin YH; Yang CM
Acta Otolaryngol; 2007 Oct; 127(10):1118-20. PubMed ID: 17851897
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Overview of early response assessment in lymphoma with FDG-PET.
MacManus MP; Seymour JF; Hicks RJ
Cancer Imaging; 2007; 7(1):10-8. PubMed ID: 17766210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Advancing Precision Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging for Lymphoma.
Wright CL; Maly JJ; Zhang J; Knopp MV
PET Clin; 2017 Jan; 12(1):63-82. PubMed ID: 27863567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. When should FDG-PET be used in the modern management of lymphoma?
Barrington SF; Mikhaeel NG
Br J Haematol; 2014 Feb; 164(3):315-28. PubMed ID: 24131306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
