FDG PET in the Management of Patients with Adrenal Masses and Adrenocortical Carcinoma
Désirée Deandreis . Sophie Leboulleux · Caroline Caramella · Martin Schlumberger · Eric Baudin
Published online: 11 November 2011 C Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011
Abstract Adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare tumor with aggressive behavior, high recurrence rate, and rapid evolution. Surgery is the only curative modality, while systemic treatments such as mitotane and chemotherapy associated to locoregional therapeutic tools remain as palliative options. Imaging has an important role in the management of patients with ACC both at diagnosis and during follow-up. First, it is necessary to characterize undetermined adrenal masses, select- ing patients for surgery. Then, in case of malignancy, it is mandatory to assess disease extension, to detect early relapse during follow-up, and to evaluate treatment response. Computed tomography scan and magnetic resonance imaging are actually the most used techniques for these intents as they are widely available in clinical practice. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) is routinely used for other malignancies and, on the basis of published data, is also becoming a promising tool in the management of ACC. Not only is it a diagnostic tool complementary to morpholog- ical imaging in the characterization of adrenal masses and in tumoral lesions detection, but it can be also useful to evaluate tumor response to treatment. New tracers and indications for the clinical use of FDG PET in this specific disease still have to be evaluated to assess its role in clinical practice.
Keywords PET . Adrenal . Incidentaloma . Adrenocortical carcinoma
D. Deandreis · S. Leboulleux · M. Schlumberger · E. Baudin Department of Nuclear Medicine and Endocrine Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France e-mail: Desiree.DEANDREIS@igr.fr
C. Caramella
Department of Radiology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
Introduction
Adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is a rare and aggressive disease. It affects patients with age ranging from 6 to 80 years, with a median age close to 40 years in most studies [49, 77]. In almost 60% of cases, the clinical presentation is a symptomatic endocrine syndrome related to tumoral secretion of glucocorticoids in most cases, androgen, estrogen, and mineralocorticoids. The size of the tumor, the local infiltration to surrounding organs or local vessels (renal vein, vena cava), and the spread to abdominal lymph nodes and to distant organs determine the stage [29]. Prognosis mainly depends on the TNM stage with an overall 5-year survival rate ranging from 20% to 80% [29, 39]. Complete tumor resection and distant metastasis are the most important clinical prognostic factors [4, 29, 39, 50, 60]. Unfortunately, invasive local extension and/or distant metastases in the liver and in the lung are present in 50% of cases at diagnosis [4, 49]. In some studies, hormonal secretion and patient age (>45 years) were also associated to more aggressive disease [36, 49]. Pathological features such as high mitotic rate (>20 mitosis per 50 high-power fields) and also atypical mitosis, necrosis, capsular invasion, tumor weight >250 g, and tumor size >10 cm are recognized as other prognostic factors [4, 76, 77]. Even after initial complete resection, disease recurrence occurs in up to 80% of the patients within the first 2 years [63]. In this context, imaging has a crucial role in the management of patients with ACC. First, it helps to detect and characterize primary adrenal tumor, selecting patient candidates for surgery. Second, when ACC is confirmed, imaging is mandatory for accurate staging, a major issue to choose the best treatment. Third, it allows for detecting the extent and the site of recurrence at an early stage, when surgery and complete resection are still feasible [60]. Finally, in patients with distant metastases, it is
essential for treatment response or disease progression evaluation either in the case of local or systemic treatment. In clinical practice, computed tomography (CT) is the most used imaging technique for primary tumor diagnosis, evaluation of local extension, and detection of liver and lung metastases. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is used as a second choice for characterization of adrenal mass and for hepatic or large vessel studies.
The role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET) in the management of patients with ACC has not yet been clearly assessed. FDG is a glucose analogue largely used in oncology nowadays to study malignancies based on increased glycolysis and higher glucose consumption in tumoral than in normal proliferating tissue. FDG PET appears to be sensitive in detecting lesions not only from thyroid carcinoma but also poorly differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (NET) or well-differentiated NET with high Ki67 and aggressive behavior [1, 75]. Interestingly, well-differentiated meta- static pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma carrying the mutation SDHB show high FDG uptake, independent of tumor progression [68]. ACC is a model of aggressive and rapidly progressive tumor which appears to be a good candidate for this technique [32, 65]. Best indications of FDG PET in ACC patients and its complementary role to standard imaging will be discussed in this paper.
Characterization and Diagnosis of Adrenocortical Carcinoma
The rate of incidental adrenal masses detected on imaging (incidentalomas) and, in particular, on abdominal CT is about 5-10% and they are more frequently (94%) non- secreting adenomas [15, 42]. Metastases are more frequent in oncologic series; in this case, their incidence rises to at least 30-50% among incidentalomas [42, 62]. Malignant primary tumors represent only 2-3% of adrenal incidenta- loma in healthy patients and, among malignant lesions, the incidence of ACC is <5% [50, 79]. Due to both, on one hand, the high frequency of adrenal lesions and, on the other hand, ACC scarcity and aggressiveness, the challenge of diagnostic imaging is to bring highly sensitive and specific information allowing early ACC resection. CT is used in the first instance to differentiate between benign and malignant lesions. In a review of 10 studies and 495 adrenal lesions by Boland et al., a lesion density ≤10 Hounsfield units on unenhanced images showed the best compromise between sensitivity (71%) and specificity (98%) to detect benign lesions [14]. This cutoff is still now considered as the reference as further studies con- firmed this result and showed even higher sensitivity (87- 89%) [44, 57].The medium-contrast washout study at
delayed CT images gives further information on lesion features, with benign lesions often presenting a faster contrast medium washout than malignant tumors. In most studies, a cutoff of 50% for relative percentage washout and a cutoff of 60% for absolute percentage washout have a higher sensitivity than unenhanced CT alone, with values ranging between 86% and 100% and a specificity ranging between 90% and 100% in detecting adenomas [10, 19, 44, 57, 59]. Chemical shift MRI is another tool that can be useful in the characterization of undetermined adrenal masses. The visual evaluation of signal drop on out-of- phase images or the quantitative evaluation of lesion/spleen signal ratio showed high sensitivity (90-100%) and variable specificity (60-100%) in differentiating lipid-rich adenomas from lipid-poor lesions [40, 45]. If chemical shift MRI has a higher sensitivity than unenhanced CT in detecting lipid-rich adenomas, its superiority to contrast- enhanced CT is, however, not clear [34, 40, 45]. At this moment, unenhanced CT still remains the first choice for adrenal imaging, followed by MRI or medium-contrast washout study in case of dubious findings [34, 40].
Several studies evaluated the role of FDG PET in the management of patients with incidental adrenal lesions detected at morphological imaging. The most recent studies included a variable number of patients (from 16 to 150) and were conducted either in patients with a previous history of extra-adrenal cancer either in patients without previous history of cancer [3, 11, 12, 18, 32, 35, 41, 53, 54, 65, 67, 72, 81, 82]. Gold standard was 6 months-1 year follow-up in nine studies or systematic surgery/biopsy in only five. In the first subgroup of patients with previous history of cancer, the goal of the studies was to evaluate the contribution of FDG PET to morphological imaging in detecting adrenal metastases. In all the studies, FDG PET showed a higher sensitivity than CT scan in the character- ization of adrenal metastases, with values ranging between 95% and 100% vs between 60% and 80%, respectively, and with specificity values very similar for both techniques (around 95%) [11, 12, 41, 81]. It should be noted that, in these reported studies including a total of 303 patients, FDG PET was mostly compared with unenhanced CT. Contrast-enhanced CT was included in the diagnostic workup of adrenal masses in 36 out of 74 (49%) patients in one study and in only 2 out of 38 (5%) in a second one [11, 41]. In selected patients, without previous history of malignancy and with incidental adrenal lesions on morpho- logical imaging, FDG PET showed a high sensitivity (around 100%) and specificity (around 90%) in detecting malignant lesions [53, 67]. Furthermore, in this specific subgroup of patients, FDG PET allows for a whole-body evaluation and detection of other unknown distant metas- tases [53]. In most of the studies, a lesion uptake higher than the normal liver uptake at visual analysis was
considered as a criterion of malignancy on FDG PET. Some groups also proposed a semiquantitative way for detecting malignancy using the maximum standardized uptake (SUVmax) or standardized uptake ratio (SUR: adrenal SUVmax/liver SUVmax) [11, 18, 54, 67]. Some authors proposed the SUVmax cutoff from 2.3 to 3.1, with a sensitivity value around 100% and a specificity ranging from 78.1% to 94%, but with an overlap in SUVmax value between benign and malignant lesions [11, 12, 54]. For the SUR, some authors have proposed a cutoff of 1.8, with sensitivity and specificity value of 100%, but until now, there is no a standardized value used in clinical practice [67].Globally, visual and semiquantitative analyses do not seem to differ in accuracy, and in some studies, qualitative analysis resulted even to be superior [3, 11, 12, 18, 41, 67]. At this moment, most of the PET scanners are combined with CT. If there is no proven superiority in terms of sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT on PET alone, the CT component could be useful to combine in one exam the metabolic and anatomic information [3]. To summarize, a meta-analysis published recently by Boland et al., including 21 studies and 1,267 patients both with or without previous history of cancer, reported a mean sensitivity and a specificity of FDG PET in differentiating benign from malignant adrenal tumor of 97% (93-98%) and 91% (87- 94%), respectively [13]. It should be noted that, for the most part, the studies are retrospective and include <50 patients. Then, the pathological standard of analyzed masses is rarely available, leading to possible overestimation of PET performances. In addition, only 50 cases of ACC were reported among the series, but all the tumors resulted to be highly FDG-avid, with SUVmax ranging from 5 to 30 in most cases [3, 18, 32, 35, 53, 54, 65, 67, 82] (Table 1). The study published in 2009 by Groussin et al. evaluated the role of FDG PET in the setting of ACC workup [32]. In this prospective study, 77 patients presenting adrenal incidenta- loma and without previous malignancy history were studied with FDG PET. A pathological confirmation of adrenal lesion was available in all cases. Final analysis was performed on 22 cases of ACC and 43 cases of adrenal adenomas. A SUVmax cutoff of 3.4 showed a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 70% and a SUR cutoff of 1.45 showed a sensitivity and a specificity of 100% and 88%, respectively, in detecting ACC.
It should be noted that FDG false-positive uptake was reported in case of functioning adrenal adenoma or benign pheochromocytoma. Interestingly, false-negative results have also been reported in case of lesions <1 cm and necrotic and hemorrhagic malignant lesions [72, 81].
In conclusion, these results show that FDG PET is a promising tool in the characterization of adrenal lesions showing high sensitivity and specificity in detecting malignant tumors. If FDG PET sensitivity was reported to
be superior to unenhanced CT in most studies, data are missing on the real advantage of PET on contrast-enhanced CT. These data have to be evaluated and confirmed in larger prospective multicentric studies expected in the setting of adrenal tumor workup. Cost-benefit and radiation exposure analyses will constitute other impor- tant endpoints of these studies. At this moment, the recommendations of using PET in the characterization of adrenal masses are limited to the cases of undeter- mined lesions at CT or MRI based on density and/or washout study and to cases of high suspicion of malignancy to perform a whole-body staging [20, 66]. The diagnosis of ACC can be mostly advocated on the basis of the clinical or hormonal presentation of the disease.
Initial Staging; Recurrence Detection
There are only few papers evaluating the role of FDG PET in the management of patients with a diagnosis of ACC in the literature. The first published papers were case reports showing that ACC was a FDG-avid tumor and suggesting how FDG PET could be useful to perform a one-time whole-body evaluation [2, 46]. A study, published by Becherer et al., evaluated ten patients with ACC, two of them at initial staging and eight at follow-up [7]. The authors showed promising preliminary results on the use of FDG PET to detect distant metastases. On a per-lesion analysis, FDG PET disclosed a sensitivity and a specificity of 100% and 97%, respectively. FDG PET detected indeed unexpected metastatic lesions in three patients, changing their stage and their treatment plan. These lesions were located in the lung, abdomen, and skeleton. Furthermore, in two patients, FDG PET detected local recurrence in the left renal fossa and in the pararenal region that were both missed by CT scan. These regions are a very common site of recurrence in case of incomplete primary surgery or in case of tumor spilling during surgery. In addition, CT specificity can be limited in the presence of fibrosis and post-surgical changes. In this study, FDG PET also detected lung metastases earlier than CT in one patient. These preliminary results showed that FDG PET could be used in association with CT scan to complete both local and distant staging and to detect early recurrence. The two most important studies that focused attention on the role of FDG PET in initial staging and recurrence detection and on its added value to standard CT were published by Leboulleux et al. and Mackie et al. [48, 51]. In the study by Leboulleux et al., FDG PET/CT was added to the normal workup in 28 ACC and compared to the diagnostic CT scan with intravenous contrast administration. In 19 patients, distant metastases were known and the remaining 9 patients were in complete remission. On the per-lesion
| Patients (n) | Verification (n), biopsy/histology | Malignant (n) | ACC (n) | Method | Sensitivity | Specificity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maurea et al., 2001 [53] | 26 | 26 | 13 | 6 | Visualª | 100% | 100% |
| Zettinig et al., 2004 [82] | 16 | 15 | 3 | 1 | Visualª | 100% | 100% |
| Tenenbaum et al., 2004 [65] | 13 | 13 | 4 | 3 | Visualª | 100% | 100% |
| Metser et al., 2006 [54] | 150 | 6 | 68 | 2 | SUVmax (3.1) | 98.5% | 92% |
| Han et al., 2007 [35] | 105 | 22 | 64 | 3 | SUVmax | NA | NA |
| Caoili et al., 2007 [18] | 59 | 4 | 12 | 1 | SUVmax and SUR | NA | NA |
| Tessonier et al., 2008 [67] | 37 | 29 | 12 | 3 | Visualª | 100% | 86% |
| SUVmax (3.28) | 91.7% | 71.4% | |||||
| SUR (1.8) | 100% | 100% | |||||
| Groussin et al., 2009 [32] | 65 | 65 | 22 | 22 | SUVmax (3.4) | 100% | 70% |
| SUR (1.45) | 100% | 88% | |||||
| Ansquer et al., 2010 [3] | 78 | 72 | 27 | 10 | Visualª | 89% | 76% |
| SUVmax (3.3) | 93% | 78% |
NA not available, SUR tumor/liver SUVmax ratio
a Considering malignancy in case FDG uptake higher than blood pool or normal liver parenchyma
analysis (n=269), FDG PET/CT did not show a better sensitivity than diagnostic CT (90% vs 88%, p=0.43). What was highly interesting was the complementarity between the two techniques, with 12% of the lesions only seen by PET/CT and 10% of the lesions only seen by CT. In this study, PET/CT alone detected more lesions in the adrenal bed (38% vs 8%), in the liver (33% vs 7%), and in the bone (30% vs 0%) than CT alone .On the other hand, CT was more sensitive than PET/CT for the detection of lung lesions (8% vs 2%), abdominal lymph nodes, and peritoneal carcinomatosis (19% vs 6%). The reduced performance of FDG PET in lung nodules was correlated with size (partial volume effect). In this study, only 15% of lung nodules with diameter <5 mm displayed FDG uptake vs 58% of nodules with diameter between 5 and 10 mm. The low sensitivity of FDG PET in detecting peritoneal carcinomatosis can also be correlated with lesion size and to the physiological uptake in the bowel that hides the uptake in the peritoneum. In studies including patients with abdominal malignancy other than ACC, FDG PET shows a lower sensitivity (~50%) in the assessment of peritoneal carcinomatosis, compared to CT [26, 64, 71]. A few FDG PET false-positive results have been reported: one in the liver in the study from Becherer et al. and three in the study by Leboulleux et al., all located in regions previously operated for distant metastases (axilla, thyroid, and pancre- as). Mackie et al. included 12 ACC patients, with a previous history of ACC [51]. All of them underwent PET or PET/CT for regular follow-up or suspicion of recurrent disease. All PET findings were explored and confirmed by biopsy or follow-up. FDG PET detected
recurrent disease in 83% patients. No false-positive findings were reported. Furthermore, this study was concordant with previous studies showing interest in performing FDG PET to detect local recurrence in the adrenal bed. For the detection of liver metastases, the results are not concordant among studies needing the inclusion of a greater number of patients. In one study, FDG PET was complementary to CT in detecting hepatic lesions, and in another study, PET showed a false-positive finding in the liver [7, 48]. It can be noticed that, in colorectal cancer, FDG PET does not seem to be superior to enhanced CT or MRI in detecting liver metastases [56]. Therefore, CT scan is used as the first choice for liver evaluation and MRI should be performed in case of small indeterminate lesions seen on CT [56].
To conclude, in these few studies, PET and diagnostic CT performed at the same time detect more lesions than PET or CT alone, and nowadays, they should be considered as complementary exams. In particular, PET seems to be more sensitive than CT in detecting local recurrence, while CT is more sensitive in detecting small lung or peritoneal metastases.
Prognostic Value
FDG PET is not only a diagnostic tool, but it might also have a prognostic meaning. In the study by Leboulleux et al., lesion SUVmax value >10 and FDG-avid tumoral volume >150 ml were correlated with worst prognosis [48]. Overall survival at 6 months was 100% for patients with lesion SUVmax <10 and 45% for patients with lesion
SUVmax >10 [48]. Furthermore, FDG uptake in this study correlated with a high mitotic rate, which is considered to be a prognostic factor in advanced ACC [50]. Another recent study indirectly confirms this finding, showing that high expression of glucose transporter isoform 1 (GLUT1) in ACC tissue evaluated by immunohistochemistry was strongly and independently correlated with a worst outcome both in patients with early and advanced stages [30]. GLUT1 expression was also correlated with shorter disease-free survival (41.9 vs 22.2 months in patients without GLUT1 expression in the tumor and in patients with GLUT1 expression, respectively). These data have been previously reported for other malignancies, showing that both tumor FDG uptake in vivo and GLUT1 expression indirectly represent aggressiveness and rapid disease evolution [17, 23, 27]. Multivariate analysis is, however, needed in order to conclude about this prognostic role.
Response to Treatment
ACC is a rapidly progressive disease currently treated with a combination of systemic (chemotherapy and mitotane) and/or local (surgery, radiotherapy, chemo- embolization, and radiofrequency ablation) treatments. Recently, randomized protocols have been implemented (http://www.firm-act.org, OSI-906 trial). The evaluation of response to treatment by imaging is a very important step in tumoral disease management and is based mainly on morphological evaluation. Some studies used the World Health Organization criteria based on the variation of the sum of the products of the greatest perpendicular lesion diameter, while others used the RECIST criteria based on CT variation of the sum of the single longest lesion diameter [28, 55]. The RECIST criteria have been recently revised and they are actually considered the most reliable to evaluate the morphologic response to systemic treatment [28]. Several studies have shown that the objective response to mitotane/cisplatin-based chemotherapy according to the RECIST criteria was a prognostic factor associated with a prolonged overall survival [9, 16, 52]. Confirmation that objective response could constitute a surrogate marker of overall survival is expected in randomized studies. Morphological response is also reported to be correlated with mitotane plasma levels (Fig. 1), while excision repair cross-complementing group 1 expression may also play a role [5, 33, 52, 58].
FDG PET has been recognized to detect early response after a few cycles of chemotherapy and to predict outcome in other malignancies, but standardized criteria to define objective response at PET are still missing [22, 31]. If the EORTC criteria are the most used in clinical practice,
a
b
recently, Wahl et al. proposed the PET Response Criteria In Solid Tumor criteria to standardize and redefine the response to systemic treatment by metabolic features quantification [74, 80]. These criteria still need to be validated in a large number of patients. The role of FDG PET in the assessment of response to systemic treatment in ACC has not yet been evaluated. In one study including ACC, no correlation was found between GLUT1 expres- sion and response to chemotherapy [30]. Furthermore, two studies analyzed FDG uptake as a function of mitotane therapy, including plasma levels, and they did not find any correlation [7, 48]. An interesting finding is that a transitory FDG uptake in the remaining gland has been reported in the year following mitotane initiation in almost 20% of patients with ACC, without any evidence of abnormality on CT [47]. Nowadays, locoregional treatments such as chemo- embolization and radiofrequency ablation are used to control tumor burden, in particular in case of liver, lung, and bone metastases. Few data are available about the efficacy of these treatments in ACC, but the results are clearly promising and correlated to the hypervascular pattern of metastases from ACC [6, 21, 24, 78]. The evaluation of response to local treatment is not based on the same principles as that for systemic treatment. The tumoral lesion diameter after embolization or ablation is larger than the initial lesion diameter because of necrosis, cystic evolution, and scar tissue as consequences of treatment. In this way, RECIST criteria based on size variation cannot be reliable for response or recurrence evaluation. FDG PET showed good accuracy in assessing response to local treatment and good sensitivity and specificity in the detection of incomplete treatment or early disease relapse after chemoembolization or radiofrequency ablation of hepatocarcinomas and liver metastases from other solid
tumors [70]. The disappearance of FDG uptake or the decrease of SUVmax 2-3 months after treatment correlates well with biological response and necrosis at histological examination; on the other hand, persistent or increased FDG uptake with time is consistent with residual disease [69, 73]. In recent papers including a few cases of ACC, FDG PET allowed assessing treatment response after radio- frequency ablation of lung metastases and to perform follow- up of the scar tissue to detect early recurrence [25, 61]. The correct timing to perform FDG PET after local treatment is not clear. At 1 month after treatment, FDG PET can detect residual tumoral disease or recurrence earlier than CT, but the risk of false-positive findings related with inflammatory changes should be known. Actually, 2-3 months appear to be the most adequate time point [25]. No data are available on PET accuracy in detecting persistent disease in the adrenal bed after surgery. In the studies of Leboulleux et al. and Mackie et al., FDG PET is very sensitive in detecting local recurrence in the adrenal bed [48, 51]. On the same principle, FDG PET could be used to perform a post-surgical evaluation to detect persistent disease in the surgical bed, considering that the completeness of primary tumor resection is among the prognostic factors of this disease. New studies are needed to evaluate this indication.
Perspectives
New tracers to characterize adrenal masses such as 11C- metomidate (MTO) have been proposed [8, 82]. This tracer is the mirror of 11ß-hydroxylase expression in vivo, the enzyme responsible for hydroxylation of 11-deoxycortisol and 11-deoxycorticosterone in cortisol and corticosterone, respectively. It was tested in incidentaloma and showed good performance in identifying tumor of adrenocortical origin [8, 37, 38, 82]. A few cases of ACC (<50) have been included, showing various degrees of 11C-MTO uptake but generally lower than the uptake observed in adenomas [8, 38, 82]. One study focusing on ACC and including only 11 patients with a total of 23 lesions not only showed the possibility to detect metastasis from ACC missed at CT scan with 11C-MTO in two cases, but also the risk of false-negative PET findings in 3 cases of necrotic and hemorrhagic lesions [43]. Nowadays, 11C-MTO still remains in the field of research.
Conclusion
At this moment, there are few and limited recommendations on the use of FDG PET in the management of patients with adrenal masses or ACC [20, 66]. In the initial characterization of adrenal masses, PET showed a higher sensitivity than unenhanced CT in detecting malignant
lesions, but no data are available on the real added value of PET to enhanced CT [13]. However, FDG PET does not allow differentiating between ACC, metastases, or malignant pheochromocytoma. Second, in ACC staging and follow-up in the few available studies, FDG PET and CT resulted to be complementary techniques, PET being more sensitive in detecting bone metastases and local recurrence in the adrenal bed, while CT seems to be more sensitive in the detection of lung lesions and peritoneal disease [48, 51]. On the same principle, FDG PET could also be performed after surgery to evaluate residual disease, but this indication still has to be evaluated. Finally, FDG PET seems promising in the evaluation of disease response to local treatment such as chemoemboliza- tion or radiofrequency ablation, while in systemic treatment, no data are available at this moment [6, 25].
To conclude, in patients with ACC, FDG PET has to be considered as a complementary tool to morphological imaging techniques, useful both in diagnosis and in detecting disease recurrence or metastatic sites, but the available studies are still few and include few patients. Further studies and large randomized multicentric trials are needed to assess its role in clinical practice.
Conflict of Interest Statement The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
References
1. Abgral R, Leboulleux S, Deandreis D, Aupérin A, Lumbroso J, Dromain C, Duvillard P, Elias D, de Baere T, Guigay J, Ducreux M, Schlumberger M, Baudin E (2011) Performance of (18) fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and somato- statin receptor scintigraphy for high Ki67 (≥10%) well- differentiated endocrine carcinoma staging. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 96(3):665-671
2. Ahmed M, Al-Sugair A, Alarifi A, Almahfouz A, Al-Sobhi S (2003) Whole-body positron emission tomographic scanning in patients with adrenal cortical carcinoma: comparison with conventional imaging procedures. Clin Nucl Med 28(6):494- 497
3. Ansquer C, Scigliano S, Mirallié E, Taïeb D, Brunaud L, Sebag F, Leux C, Drui D, Dupas B, Renaudin K, Kraeber-Bodéré F (2010) 18F-FDG PET/CT in the characterization and surgical decision concerning adrenal masses: a prospective multicentre evaluation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37(9):1669-1678
4. Assie G, Antoni G, Tisiier F, Caillou B, Abiven G, Gicquel C, Leboulleux S, Travagli JP, Dromain C, Bertagna X, Bertherat J, Schlumberger M, Baudin E (2007) Prognostic parameters of metastastic adrenocortical carcinoma. J Clin Endo Metab 92:148- 154
5. Baudin E, Pellegriti G, Bonnay M, Penfornis A, Laplanche A, Vassal G, Schlumberger M (2001) Impact of monitoring plasma 1,1-dichlorodiphenildichloroethane (o,p’DDD) levels on the treat- ment of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma. Cancer 92 (6):1385-1392
6. Bauditz J, Quinkler M, Wermke W (2009) Radiofrequency thermal ablation of hepatic metastases of adrenocortical cancer- a case report and review of the literature. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 117(7):316-319
7. Becherer A, Vierhapper H, Potzi C, Karanikas G, Kurtaran A, Schmaljohann J, Staudeherz A, Dudczak R, Kletter K (2001) FDG PET in adrenocortical carcinoma. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 4:289-295
8. Bergström M, Juhlin C, Bonasera TA, Sundin A, Rastad J, Akerström G, Långström B (2000) PET imaging of adrenal cortical tumors with the 11beta-hydroxylase tracer 11C- metomidate. J Nucl Med 41(2):275-282
9. Berruti A, Terzolo M, Sperone P, Pia A, Casa SD, Gross DJ, Carnaghi C, Casali P, Porpiglia F, Mantero F, Reimondo G, Angeli A, Dogliotti L (2005) Etoposide, doxorubicin and cisplatin plus mitotane in the treatment of advanced adrenocortical carcinoma: a large prospective phase II trial. Endocr Relat Cancer 12(3):657-666
10. Blake MA, Kalra MK, Sweeney AT, Lucey BC, Maher MM, Sahani DV, Halpern EF, Mueller PR, Hahn PF, Boland GW (2006) Distinguish benign from malignant adrenal masses: multi-detector row CT protocol with 10-minute delay. Radiology 238:578-585
11. Blake MA, Slattery JM, Kalra MK, Halpern EF, Fishmann AJ, Mueller PR, Boland GW (2006) Adrenal lesions: character- ization with fused PET/CT image in patients with proved or suspected malignancy-initial experience. Radiology 238:970-977
12. Boland GW, Blake MA, Holalkere NS, Hahn PF (2009) PET/CT for the characterization of adrenal masses in patients with cancer: qualitative versus quantitative accuracy in 150 consecutive patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192(4):956-962
13. Boland GW, Dwamena BA, Sangwaiya MJ, Goehler AG, Blake MA, Hahn PF, Scott JA, Kelra MK (2011) Characterization of adrenal masses by using FDG PET: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. Radiology 259:117-126
14. Boland GW, Lee MJ, Gazelle GS, Halpern EF, McNicholas MM, Mueller PR (1998) Characterization of adrenal masses using unenhanced CT: an analysis of the CT literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171(1):201-204
15. Bovio S, Cataldi A, Reimondo G, Sperone P, Novello S, Berruti A, Borasio P, Fava C, Dogliotti L, Scagliotti GV, Angeli A, Terzolo M (2006) Prevalence of adrenal incidentaloma in a contemporary computerized tomography series. J Endocrinol Invest 29:298-302
16. Bukowski RM, Wolfe M, Levine HS, Crawford DE, Stephens RL, Gaynor E, Harker WG (1993) Phase II trial of mitotane and cisplatin in patients with adrenal carcinoma: a Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 11:161-165
17. Cantuaria G, Fagotti A, Ferrandina G, Magalhaes A, Nadji M, Angioli R, Penalver M, Mancuso S, Scambia G (2001) GLUT-1 expression in ovarian carcinoma: association with survival and response to chemotherapy. Cancer 92(5):1144-1150
18. Caoili EM, Korobkin M, Brown RK, Mackie G, Shulkin BL (2007) Differentiating adrenal adenomas from nonadenomas using (18)F-FDG PET/CT: quantitative and qualitative evaluation. Acad Radiol 14:468-475
19. Caoili EM, Korobkin M, Francis IR, Cohan RH, Platt JF, Dunnick NR, Raghupathi KI (2002) Adrenal masses: characterization with combined unenhanced and delayed enhanced CT. Radiology 222 (3):629-633
20. Caron P, Tabarin A (2010) 2010 Congress of the French Society of Endocrinology at Deauville. Ann Endocrinol 71(Suppl 1):S1-S2
21. Cazejust J, De Baère T, Auperin A, Deschamps F, Hechelhammer L, Abdel-Rehim M, Schlumberger M, Leboulleux S, Baudin E (2010) Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for liver
metastases in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21(10):1527-1532
22. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, Faria SC, Macapinlac HA, Burgess MA, Patel SR, Chen LL, Podoloff DA, Benjamin RS (2007) Correlation of computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor treated at a single institution with imatinib mesylate: proposal of new computed tomography response criteria. J Clin Oncol 25(13):1753-1759
23. Cooper R, Sarioğlu S, Sökmen S, Füzün M, Küpelioğlu A, Valentine H, Görken IB, Airley R, West C (2003) Glucose transporter-1 (GLUT-1): a potential marker of prognosis in rectal carcinoma? Br J Cancer 89(5):870-876
24. de Baère T, Palussière J, Aupérin A, Hakime A, Abdel-Rehim M, Kind M, Dromain C, Ravaud A, Tebboune N, Boige V, Malka D, Lafont C, Ducreux M (2006) Midterm local efficacy and survival after radiofrequency ablation of lung tumors with minimum follow-up of 1 year: prospective evaluation. Radiology 240 (2):587-596
25. Deandreis D, Leboulleux S, Dromain C, Auperin A, Coulot J, Lumbroso J, Deschamps F, Rao P, Schlumberger M, de Baère T (2011) Role of FDG PET/CT and chest CT in the follow-up of lung lesions treated with radiofrequency ablation. Radiology 258 (1):270-276
26. Dromain C, Leboulleux S, AuperinA GD, Malka D, Lumbroso J, Schlumberger M, Sigal R, Elias D (2008) Staging of peritoneal carcinomatosis: enhanced CT vs PET/CT. Abdom Imag 33:87-93
27. Eckert AW, Lautner MH, Taubert H, Schubert J, Bilkenroth U (2008) Expression of Glut-1 is a prognostic marker for oral squamous cell carcinoma patients. Oncol Rep 20(6):1381-1385
28. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M, Rubinstein L, Shankar L, Dodd L, Kaplan R, Lacombe D, Verweij J (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45(2):228-247
29. Fassnacht M, Johanssen S, Quinkler M, Bucsky P, Willenberg HS, Beuschlein F, Terzolo M, Mueller HH, Hahner S, Allolio B, German Adrenocortical Carcinoma Registry Group, European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors (2009) Limited prognostic value of the 2004 International Union Against Cancer staging classification for adrenocortical carcinoma: proposal for a Revised TNM Classification. Cancer 115(2):243-250
30. Fenske W, Völker HU, Adam P, Hahner S, Johanssen S, Wortmann S, Schmidt M, Morcos M, Müller-Hermelink HK, Allolio B, Fassnacht M (2009) Glucose transporter GLUT1 expression is a stage-independent predictor of clinical outcome in adrenocortical carcinoma. Endocr Relat Cancer 16:919-928
31. Gallamini A, Hutchings M, Rigacci L, Specht L, Merli F, Hansen M, Patti C, Loft A, Di Raimondo F, D’Amore F, Biggi A, Vitolo U, Stelitano C, Sancetta R, Trentin L, Luminari S, Iannitto E, Viviani S, Pierri I, Levis A (2007) Early interim 2-[18F]fluoro-2- deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to international prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J Clin Oncol 25(24):3746-3752
32. Groussin L, Bonardel G, Silvéra S, Tissier F, Coste J, Abiven G, Libé R, Bienvenu M, Alberini JL, Salenave S, Bouchard P, Bertherat J, Dousset B, Legmann P, Richard B, Foehrenbach H, Bertagna X, Tenenbaum F (2009) 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for the diagnosis of adrenocortical tumors: a prospective study in 77 operated patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 94(5):1713-1722
33. Haak HR, Hermans J, van de Velde CJ, Lentjes EG, Goslings BM, Fleuren GJ, Krans HM (1994) Optimal treatment of adrenocortical carcinoma with mitotane: results in a consecutive series of 96 patients. Br J Cancer 69(5):947-951
34. Haider MA, Ghai S, Jhaveri K, Lockwood G (2004) Chemical shift MR imaging of hyperattenuating (>10 HU) adrenal masses: does it still have a role? Radiology 231(3):711-716
35. Han SJ, Kim TS, Jeon SW, Jeong SJ, Yun M, Rhee Y, Kang ES, Cha BS, Lee EJ, Lee HC, Lim SK (2007) Analysis of adrenal masses by 18F-FDG positron emission tomography scanning. Int J Clin Pract 61(5):802-809
36. Harrison LE, Gaudin PB, Brenann MF (1999) Pathologic features of prognostic significance for adrenocortical carcinoma after curative resection. Arch Surg 134:181-185
37. Hennings J, Hellman P, Ahlström H, Sundin A (2009) Computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and 11C-metomidate positron emission tomography for evaluation of adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Radiol 69:314-323
38. Hennings J, Lindhe O, Bergström M, Långström B, Sundin A, Hellman P (2006) [11C]metomidate positron emission tomogra- phy of adrenocortical tumors in correlation with histopathological findings. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91(4):1410-1414
39. Icard P, Goudet P, Chrapeney C, Andreassian B, Carnaille B, Chapuis Y, Cougard P, Henry JF, Proye C (2001) Adrenocortical carcinomas: surgical trends and results of a 253-patient series from the French Association of Endocrine Surgeons Study Group. World J Surg 25:891-897
40. Israel GM, Korobnik M, Wang C, Hecht EN, Krinsky GA (2004) Comparison of unenhanced CT and chemical shift MRI in evaluating lipid-rich adrenal adenomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:215-219
41. Jana S, Zhang T, Milstein DM, Isasi CR, Blaufox MD (2006) FDG PET and CT characterization of adrenal lesions in cancer patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33:29-35
42. Jr Y (2007) Clinical practice. The incidentally discovered adrenal mass. N Eng J Med 356:601-610
43. Khan TS, Sundin A, Juhlin C, Långström B, Bergström M, Eriksson B (2003) 11C-metomidate PET imaging of adrenocorti- cal cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30(3):403-410
44. Korobkin M, Brodeur FJ, Francis IR, Quint LE, Dunnick NR, Londy F (1998) CT time-attenuation washout curves of adrenal adenomas and nonadenomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:747-752
45. Korobkin M, Giordano TJ, Brodeur FJ, Francis IR, Siegelman ES, Quint LE, Dunnick NR, Heiken JP, Wang HH (1996) Adrenal adenomas: relationship between histologic lipid and CT and MRI findings. Radiology 200:743-747
46. Kreissig R, Amthauer H, Krude H, Steinmueller P, Stroszczynski C, Hosten N, Grueters A, Felix R (2000) The use of FDG-PET and CT for the staging of adrenocortical carcinoma in children. Pediatr Radiol 30(5):306
47. Leboulleux S, Deandreis D, Escourrou C, Al Ghuzlan A, Bidault F, Aupérin A, Travagli JP, Lumbroso J, Schlumberger M, Baudin E (2011) Fluorodesoxyglucose uptake in the remaining adrenal glands during the follow-up of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma: do not consider it as malignancy. Eur J Endocrinol 164(1):89-94
48. Leboulleux S, Dromain C, Bonniaud G, Aupérin A, Caillou B, Lumbroso J, Sigal R, Baudin E (2006) Diagnostic and prognostic value of 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in adrenocortical carcinoma: a prospective comparison with computed tomography. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91(3):920-925
49. Luton JP, Cerda S, Bilalud L, Thomas G, Guilhaume B, Bertagna X, Laudat MH, Louvel A, Chapuis Y, Blondeau P, Bonnin A, Bricaire H (1990) Clinical features of adrenocortical carcinoma, prognostic factors, and the effect of mitotane therapy. N Engl J Med 322:1195-1200
50. Luton JP, Martinez M, Coste J, Bertherat J (2000) Outcome in patients with adrenal incidentaloma selected for surgery: an analysis of 88 cases investigated in a single clinical center. Eur J Endocrinol 143:111-117
51. Mackie GC, Shulkin BL, Ribeiro RC, Worden FP, Gauger PG, Mody RJ, Connolly LP, Kunter G, Rodriguez-Galindo C, Wallis JW,
Hurwitz CA, Schteingart DE (2006) Use of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in evaluating locally recurrent and metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91 (7):2665-2671
52. Malandrino P, Al Ghuzlan A, Castaing M, Young J, Caillou B, Travagli JP, Elias D, de Baere T, Dromain C, Paci A, Chanson P, Schlumberger M, Leboulleux S, Baudin E (2010) Prognostic markers of survival after combined mitotane- and platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma. Endocr Relat Cancer 17(3):797-807
53. Maurea S, Klain M, Mainolfi C, Ziviello M, Salvatore M (2001) The diagnostic role of radionuclide imaging in evaluation of patients with nonhypersecreting adrenal masses. J Nucl Med 42 (6):884-892
54. Metser U, Miller E, Lerman H, Lievshitz G, Avital S, Even-Sapir E (2006) 18F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of adrenal masses. J Nucl Med 47(1):32-37
55. Miller AB, Hoogstraten B, Staquet M, Winkler A (1981) Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 47:207-214
56. Niekel MC, Bipat S, Stoker J (2010) Diagnostic imaging of colorectal liver metastases with CT, MR imaging, FDG PET, and/ or FDG PET/CT: a meta-analysis of prospective studies including patients who have not previously undergone treatment. Radiology 257(3):674-684
57. Pena CS, Boland GW, Hahn PF, Lee MJ, Mueller PR (2000) Characterisation of indeterminate (lipid-poor) adrenal masses: use of washout characteristics at contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology 217:798-802
58. Ronchi CL, Sbiera S, Kraus L, Wortmann S, Johanssen S, Adam P, Willenberg HS, Hahner S, Allolio B, Fassnacht M (2009) Expression of excision repair cross complementing group 1 and prognosis in adrenocortical carcinoma patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Endocr Relat Cancer 16(3):907- 918
59. Sangwaiya MJ, Boland GW, Cronin CG, Blake MA, Halpern EF, Hahn PF (2010) Incidental adrenal lesions: accuracy of charac- terization with contract-enhanced washout multidetector CT-10 minute delayed imaging protocol revisited in a large patient cohort. Radiology 256:504-510
60. Schulick RD, Brennan MF (1999) Long term survival after complete resection and repeat resection in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 6:719-726
61. Singnurkar A, Solomon SB, Gönen M, Larson SM, Schöder H (2010) 18F-FDG PET/CT for the prediction and detection of local recurrence after radiofrequency ablation of malignant lung lesions. J Nucl Med 51(12):1833-1840
62. Song JH, Chuadhry FS, Mayo-Smith W (2008) The incidental indeterminate adrenal mass on CT: prevalence of adrenal disease in 1049 consecutive adrenal masses in patients with known malignancy. AJR Roentgenol 190:1163-1168
63. Stojadinovic A, Ghossein RA, Hoos A, Nissan A, Marshall D, Dudas M, Cordon-Cardo C, Jaques DP, Brennan MF (2002) Adrenocortical carcinoma: clinical, morphologic, and molecular characterization. J Clin Oncol 20(4):941-950
64. Suzuki A, Kawano T, Takahashi N, Lee J, Nakagami Y, Miyagi E, Hirahara F, Togo S, Shimada H, Inoue T (2004) Value of 18F- FDG PET in the detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 31:1413-1420
65. Tenenbaum F, Groussin L, Foehrenbach H, Tissier F, Gouya H, Bertherat J, Dousset B, Legmann P, Richard B, Bertagna X (2004) 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography as a diagnostic tool for malignancy of adrenocortical tumours? Preliminary results in 13 consecutive patients. Eur J Endocrinol 150(6):789-792
66. Terzolo M, Stigliano A, Chiodini I, Loli P, Furlani L, Arnaldi G, Reimondo G, Pia A, Toscano V, Zini M, Borretta G, Papini E,
Garofalo P, Allolio B, Dupas B, Mantero F, Tabarin A, Italian Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (2011) AME position statement on adrenal incidentaloma. Eur J Endocrinol 164(6):851- 857
67. Tessonier L, Sebag F, Palazzo FF, Colavolpe C, De Micco C, Mancini J, Conte-Devolx B, Henry JF, Mundler O, Taieb D (2008) Does 18F-FDG PET add diagnostic accuracy in inciden- tally identified non-secreting adrenal tumors? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35:2018-2025
68. Timmers HJ, Chen CC, Carrasquillo JA, Whatley M, Ling A, Havekes B, Eisenhofer G, Martiniova L, Adams KT, Pacak K (2009) Comparison of 18F-fluoro-L-DOPA, 18F- fluoro-deoxyglucose, and 18F-fluorodopamine PET and 123I- MIBG scintigraphy in the localization of pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 94(12):4757- 4767
69. Torizuka T, Tamaki N, Inokuma T, Magata Y, Yonekura Y, Tanaka A, Yamaoka Y, Yamamoto K, Konishi J (1994) Value of fluorine- 18-FDG-PET to monitor hepatocellular carcinoma after interven- tional therapy. J Nucl Med 35(12):1965-1969
70. Travaini LL, Trifirò G, Ravasi L, Monfardini L, Della Vigna P, Bonomo G, Chiappa A, Mallia A, Ferrari M, Orsi F, Paganelli G (2008) Role of [18F]FDG-PET/CT after radiofrequency ablation of liver metastases: preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35(7):1316-1322
71. Turlakow A, Yeung HW, Salmon AS, Macapinlac HA, Larson SM (2003) Peritoneal carcinomatosis: role of 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 44:1407-1412
72. Vikram R, Yeung HD, Macapinlac HA, Iyer RB (2008) Utility of PET/CT in differentiating benign from malignant adrenal nodules in patients with cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191 (5):1545-1551
73. Vitola JV, Delbeke D, Meranze SG, Mazer MJ, Pinson CW (1996) Positron emission tomography with F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose to evaluate the results of hepatic chemoembolization. Cancer 78 (10):2216-2222
74. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA (2009) From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 50(Suppl 1):122S-150S
75. Wang W, Macapinlac H, Larson SM, Yeh SD, Akhurst T, Finn RD, Rosai J, Robbins RJ (1999) [18F]-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose positron emission tomography localizes residual thyroid cancer in patients with negative diagnostic (131)I whole body scans and elevated serum thyroglobulin levels. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 84(7):2291-2302
76. Weiss LM (1984) Comparative histologic study of 43 metastasizing and non metastasizing adrenocortical tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 8:163-169
77. Weiss LM, Medeiros LJ, Vickery AL (1989) Pathologic features of prognostic significance in adrenocortical carcinoma. Am J Surg Path 13(3):202-206
78. Wood BJ, Abraham J, Hvizda JL, Alexander HR, Fojo T (2003) Radiofrequency ablation of adrenal tumors and adrenocortical carcinoma metastases. Cancer 97(3):554-560
79. Young WF Jr (2000) Management approaches to adrenal incidentalomas: a view from Rochester, Minnesota. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 29:159-185
80. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, Herholz K, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma AA, Pruim J, Price P (1999) Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeox- yglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer 35:1773-1782
81. Yun M, Kim W, Alnafisi N, Lacorte L, Jang S, Alavi A (2001) 18F-FDG PET in characterizing adrenal lesions detected on CT or MRI. J Nucl Med 42:1795-1799
82. Zettinig G, Mitterhauser M, Wadsak W, Becherer A, Pirich C, Vierhapper H, Niederle B, Dudczak R, Kletter K (2004) Positron emission tomography imaging of adrenal masses: 18F- fluorodeoxyglucose and 11ß-hydroxylase tracer 11C-metomidate. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imag 31:1224-1230